TWM v R [2018] NSWCCA 276

TWM v R [2018] NSWCCA 276

The acquittals on specific counts were rationally reconcilable with the guilty verdicts, due to factual inconsistencies, evidentiary limitations, and appropriate jury caution in assessing credibility. The jury was entitled to accept the complainant's evidence on some counts and not others; the guilty verdicts were open and supported by available evidence.

Parties
Applicant: TWM; Respondent: The Crown
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
04 December 2018
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Leave to Appeal and Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Appeal Against Conviction, Sexual Offences, Credibility Assessment, Jury Verdicts, Reasonableness of Verdicts, Inconsistency of 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 5 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

TWM

Applicant

The Crown

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Leave to Appeal and Appeal Against Conviction

  1. 1 Whether the guilty verdicts on multiple counts are reasonable given acquittals on other counts
  2. 2 Whether inconsistencies in the complainant's evidence undermine credibility and reliability
  3. 3 Whether the jury's verdicts can be rationally reconciled

Ratio Decidendi

The acquittals on specific counts were rationally reconcilable with the guilty verdicts, due to factual inconsistencies, evidentiary limitations, and appropriate jury caution in assessing credibility. The jury was entitled to accept the complainant's evidence on some counts and not others; the guilty verdicts were open and supported by available evidence.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed

Orders

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