The case confirms that where the defence case at trial posits a fundamentally different version of events (here, that the accused were rescuers not attackers), the failure to put that proposition directly to key Crown witnesses in cross-examination (per Browne v Dunn) does not assist the appellants on an unreasonableness appeal. The case also confirms that the cumulative assessment approach to evidence applies not only to purely circumstantial cases but also to cases involving a combination of direct evidence and circumstantial inferences.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 52 later cases that cite this judgment.
15 of the 52 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.