White v R [2018] NSWCCA 156

White v R [2018] NSWCCA 156

The conviction on count 7 was not unreasonable. The complainant's evidence, together with items found in and near the shed and DNA evidence on a used condom, provided a strong basis for finding penile/vaginal intercourse on the occasion charged in count 7. It was open to the jury to find that the complainant did not consent and communicated that lack of consent to the applicant. The acquittals on other counts were rationally distinguishable because many counts were not capable of corroboration by the condom and DNA evidence, count 4 was said ultimately not to involve a condom, and count 9 was less detailed and potentially uncertain as to penetration. The verdict of guilty on count 7 was...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
27 July 2018
Procedural Posture
Criminal Conviction Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Conviction From the District Court of New South Wales
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['child Sexual Assault' 'unreasonable Verdict' 'inconsistent Verdicts' 'consent' 'dna Evidence' 'aggravated Sexual Intercourse Without Consent']
['criminal Law' 'criminal Appeals'] ['child Sexual Assault' 'unreasonable Verdict' 'inconsistent Verdicts' 'consent' 'dna Evidence' 'aggravated Sexual Intercourse Without Consent']

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 Conviction Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Conviction From the District Court of New South Wales

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the guilty verdict on count 7 was unreasonable and could not be supported having regard to the evidence.' 'Whether the jury could rationally convict on count 7 while acquitting on all other counts and alternative counts.' "Whether it was open to the jury to be satisfied that the sexual intercourse alleged in count 7 occurred without the complainant's consent and with the applicant's knowledge of that lack of consent." 'Whether the DNA and physical evidence found at and near the shed provided corroboration specifically capable of supporting count 7.']

Ratio Decidendi

The conviction on count 7 was not unreasonable. The complainant's evidence, together with items found in and near the shed and DNA evidence on a used condom, provided a strong basis for finding penile/vaginal intercourse on the occasion charged in count 7. It was open to the jury to find that the complainant did not consent and communicated that lack of consent to the applicant. The acquittals on other counts were rationally distinguishable because many counts were not capable of corroboration by the condom and DNA evidence, count 4 was said ultimately not to involve a condom, and count 9 was less detailed and potentially uncertain as to penetration. The verdict of guilty on count 7 was...

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.

Orders

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