Where the Crown case depends on a sole eyewitness whose evidence is internally inconsistent and who concedes unreliability of his own recollection, and the supporting medical evidence is expressed only in terms of probability with a competing expert opinion of comparable force, the verdict may be unreasonable under the M v The Queen test. Demeanour-based preference for one expert over another of comparable standing is a dangerous basis for resolving conflicting expert evidence.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 3 later cases that cite this judgment.