Where a jury acquits on some counts and convicts on others in a multi-count trial relying on coincidence evidence, the acquittals will not render the convictions unreasonable if there is a readily available explanation for the different verdicts based on distinguishing features of the evidence on each count. The question whether a post-conviction admission made to a forensic psychiatrist can be used on appeal under the s 6(1) proviso or s 8 retrial power remains open.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 27 later cases that cite this judgment.
9 of the 27 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.