New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

New Zealand Case Law

Jury verdict inconsistency

  • 20 Feb 2020

    SIDDHARTH SHARMA v R [2020] NZSC 12

    Citation
    [2020] NZSC 12
    Court
    Supreme Court

    Leave to appeal was dismissed because the Court of Appeal correctly concluded the evidence showed two distinct, logically separable sexual episodes so inconsistent verdicts could be rationally reached; no issue of general or public importance and no appearance of miscarriage of justice under the statutory test.

    • Consent
    • Reasonable belief
    • Jury verdict inconsistency
    • Leave to appeal

  • 18 Dec 2006

    ROSS FERGUSON BURNS V R SC 81/2006

    Citation
    SC 81/2006
    Court
    Supreme Court

    Leave to appeal was refused because the grounds raised did not disclose a question of general or public importance nor a miscarriage of justice; the Court of Appeal had adequately considered the issues, credibility was for the jury, and explanations existed for the differing verdicts.

    • Indecent assault
    • Leave to appeal
    • Miscarriage of justice
    • Credibility of complainant
    • Repetitive interviewing
    • Jury verdict inconsistency