A trial judge's correct self-direction on the onus of proof is not sufficient if the reasons, read as a whole, reveal that the judge subconsciously placed an onus on the accused to raise a reasonable doubt. Assessing defence evidence piecemeal as failing individually to raise a reasonable doubt, without considering the combined effect of all the evidence, may constitute a miscarriage of justice even where the verdict is not unsafe or unsatisfactory. A conviction may be quashed and a new trial ordered where the reasoning process is flawed, notwithstanding that the evidence was sufficient to support a conviction.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 3 later cases that cite this judgment.