TK v R [2009] NSWCCA 151

TK v R [2009] NSWCCA 151

The appeal against conviction was dismissed because the guilty verdicts could be rationally explained by the differences in evidence across counts, particularly regarding consent and the accused's knowledge in charges of sexual intercourse without consent. The acquittals did not necessarily reflect a general doubt about the complainant's credibility, and there were no unsatisfactory jury deliberations or compromise. The trial was conducted fairly and the failure to give the requested direction about jury room conduct did not result in a miscarriage of justice.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
26 May 2009
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
Appeal against conviction dismissed
Legal Topics
['offences Against the Person' 'common Assault' 'using an Offensive Weapon With Intent to Commit an Indictable Offence' 'intimidation With Intent to Cause Fear of Physical or Mental Harm' 'sexual Intercourse Without Consent' 'unreasonable or Unsafe and Unsatisfactory Convictions' 'mixed Verdicts' 'jury Directions']
['criminal Law'] ['offences Against the Person' 'common Assault' 'using an Offensive Weapon With Intent to Commit an Indictable Offence' 'intimidation With Intent to Cause Fear of Physical or Mental Harm' 'sexual Intercourse Without Consent' 'unreasonable or Unsafe and Unsatisfactory Convictions' 'mixed Verdicts' 'jury Directions']

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 / Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the jury’s verdicts of guilty were unreasonable or unsafe and unsatisfactory having regard to the evidence and mixed verdicts' 'Whether there was error in failing to direct the jury as requested concerning overbearing conduct in the jury room']

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal against conviction was dismissed because the guilty verdicts could be rationally explained by the differences in evidence across counts, particularly regarding consent and the accused's knowledge in charges of sexual intercourse without consent. The acquittals did not necessarily reflect a general doubt about the complainant's credibility, and there were no unsatisfactory jury deliberations or compromise. The trial was conducted fairly and the failure to give the requested direction about jury room conduct did not result in a miscarriage of justice.

Court Disposition

Appeal against conviction dismissed

Orders

  • ['The appeal against conviction is dismissed']