Karui v Malogorski

[2011] NTSC 17

Supreme Court of the Northern Territory

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Appeal
2. › Criminal appeal
3. › Appeal against conviction
4. › Unsafe and unsatisfactory verdict
5. › Inconsistent evidence of complainant
6. › Whether open to magistrate to be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt
1. Evidence
2. › Prior inconsistent statements
3. › Adoption of prior statement by witness in court
4. › Whether magistrate improperly used prior statement as evidence of truth of contents
1. Evidence
2. › Credibility
3. › Inconsistent evidence
4. › Acceptance of part of witness's evidence
5. › Whether magistrate entitled to accept evidence consistent with physical evidence and prior statement

Quick Take

Where a witness initially resiles from a prior statement but then adopts substantially the whole of it when questioned in court, the tribunal of fact acts on the adopted evidence (not the prior statement) and is entitled to accept the parts consistent with physical evidence and the prior account, particularly where the witness provides a convincing explanation for the initial inconsistency.