Where a jury's verdict on one count necessarily involves rejection of the accused's version of events (here, the burglary verdict required finding the accused entered armed with the bat), the proviso may be applied to uphold a conviction on a related count even where self-defence was erroneously not left to the jury. A compensation order under s 35 of the Penalties and Sentences Act 1992 (Qld) may be manifestly excessive where the offender has no realistic prospect of paying the amount ordered.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 3 later cases that cite this judgment.