MC v R [2017] NSWCCA 274

MC v R [2017] NSWCCA 274

The verdicts were logically explainable due to the presence or absence of corroborating evidence and direct challenge, and were supported by sufficient detail and credible evidence from the complainant regarding Counts 1-4. The jury was entitled to accept her evidence, and the differences in verdicts were not unreasonable.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 November 2017
Procedural Posture
Conviction Appeal / Leave to Appeal and Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['conviction Appeals' 'aggravated Indecent Assault on Child' 'sexual Intercourse With Child' 'unreasonable Verdicts' 'consistency of Jury Verdicts']
['criminal Law'] ['conviction Appeals' 'aggravated Indecent Assault on Child' 'sexual Intercourse With Child' 'unreasonable Verdicts' 'consistency of Jury Verdicts']

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 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Conviction Appeal / Leave to Appeal and Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether verdicts of guilty for counts 1-4 were unreasonable or inconsistent with verdicts of acquittal for counts 5-7' 'Whether ample evidence existed to support the convictions' 'Whether differences in verdicts have a logical explanation']

Ratio Decidendi

The verdicts were logically explainable due to the presence or absence of corroborating evidence and direct challenge, and were supported by sufficient detail and credible evidence from the complainant regarding Counts 1-4. The jury was entitled to accept her evidence, and the differences in verdicts were not unreasonable.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal granted' 'Appeal is dismissed']