Where defence counsel elects to have evidence of complaint received as evidence of prior inconsistent statements rather than as complaint evidence, the accused cannot on appeal complain that the judge failed to direct the jury on the limited use of complaint evidence. The principle from Suresh v The Queen applies: it would undermine the adversarial system if the admission of evidence on a particular basis for rational forensic reasons could result in the quashing of a conviction when the forensic tactic fails. A verdict of guilty on one count of rape is not inconsistent with acquittals on other counts where the acquittals are explicable by reference to the jury's possible doubt about the accused's reasonable belief in consent on those counts, or doubt about the precise acts constituting those counts.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 12 later cases that cite this judgment.
4 of the 12 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.