R v R

The Queensland Court of Appeal held that a jury could not properly return guilty verdicts on both rape and unlawful carnal knowledge arising from the same act of intercourse, as the latter is an alternative verdict presupposing consensual intercourse while rape requires absence of consent. The rape conviction was upheld, but the unlawful carnal knowledge conviction was quashed and a verdict of acquittal entered. The Court also addressed grounds concerning jury directions on lies told by the appellant, consent obtained through intimidation, and the complainant's distressed condition, finding no error warranting interference with the rape conviction.