Sawyer v R [2020] NSWCCA 179

Sawyer v R [2020] NSWCCA 179

It was open to the jury, on the whole of the evidence—including the complainant's consistent account that she was asleep and woke to the feeling of penetration, supporting evidence of her intoxicated and impaired state, corroborative witnesses, and expert evidence—to find beyond reasonable doubt that the complainant did not consent to sexual intercourse and that the applicant knew she was not consenting. The applicant's contrary version was reasonably rejected by the jury, and the verdict was not unreasonable or unsupported by the evidence.

Parties
Applicant: Matthew Sawyer; Respondent Crown: Regina
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
31 July 2020
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Leave to Appeal Against Conviction and Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
Appeal against conviction dismissed; leave to appeal granted.
Legal Topics
Conviction Appeal, Sexual Intercourse Without Consent, Consent, Unreasonable Verdict, Memory Blackout, Sexual Assault, Credibility of Complainant
Criminal Law Conviction Appeal Sexual Intercourse Without Consent Consent Unreasonable Verdict Memory Blackout Sexual Assault Credibility of Complainant

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Matthew Sawyer

Applicant

Regina

Respondent Crown

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Leave to Appeal Against Conviction and Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether it was open to the jury to be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt of the applicant's guilt
  2. 2 Whether the complainant consented to sexual intercourse
  3. 3 Whether it was reasonably possible the applicant honestly believed the complainant was consenting

Ratio Decidendi

It was open to the jury, on the whole of the evidence—including the complainant's consistent account that she was asleep and woke to the feeling of penetration, supporting evidence of her intoxicated and impaired state, corroborative witnesses, and expert evidence—to find beyond reasonable doubt that the complainant did not consent to sexual intercourse and that the applicant knew she was not consenting. The applicant's contrary version was reasonably rejected by the jury, and the verdict was not unreasonable or unsupported by the evidence.

Court Disposition

Appeal against conviction dismissed; leave to appeal granted.

Orders

  • Leave to appeal against conviction is granted.
  • The appeal against conviction is dismissed.