REGINA v. SAW [2001] NSWCCA 222

REGINA v. SAW [2001] NSWCCA 222

The conviction on count five was unreasonable because the complainant's evidence was crucial to all counts, the appellant denied all alleged sexual conduct, independent evidence contradicted the complainant on other counts, the jury acquitted on related counts, and the court was left with a reasonable doubt not dispelled by the jury's advantage in seeing and hearing the witnesses. The appeal was therefore allowed and an acquittal entered.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
04 June 2001
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence / Appeal to the New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal From a District Court Conviction on One Count After Acquittals on Other Counts
Outcome
Appeal allowed; acquittal entered.
Legal Topics
['appeal Against Conviction' 'sexual Offences' 'unreasonable Verdict' 'complainant Credibility' 'jury Acquittals on Related Counts']
['criminal Law'] ['appeal Against Conviction' 'sexual Offences' 'unreasonable Verdict' 'complainant Credibility' 'jury Acquittals on Related Counts']

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

Criminal Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence / Appeal to the New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal From a District Court Conviction on One Count After Acquittals on Other Counts

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the guilty verdict on count five was unreasonable in light of the complainant's evidence, the appellant's denial, contradictory independent evidence on other counts, and acquittals on other counts." 'Whether the trial judge erred by failing to direct the jury on how to proceed if not satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the complainant was telling the truth in relation to one or more counts.']

Ratio Decidendi

The conviction on count five was unreasonable because the complainant's evidence was crucial to all counts, the appellant denied all alleged sexual conduct, independent evidence contradicted the complainant on other counts, the jury acquitted on related counts, and the court was left with a reasonable doubt not dispelled by the jury's advantage in seeing and hearing the witnesses. The appeal was therefore allowed and an acquittal entered.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; acquittal entered.

Orders

  • ['Appeal allowed.' 'Acquittal entered.']