Where an appellant raises different defences to different counts (consent on one count, denial of the act on another), mixed verdicts are not necessarily inconsistent under Jones v R because the issues on each count are fundamentally different. An erroneous judicial direction that favours the accused may provide a rational explanation for an acquittal that would otherwise appear inconsistent with a conviction on another count.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 2 later cases that cite this judgment.