The question on an unsafe or unsatisfactory verdict ground is whether the jury must — not might — have had a reasonable doubt as to the accused's guilt on the whole of the evidence. Where the evidence of a child complainant contains significant inconsistencies, the complainant had both knowledge and motive to fabricate, and the corroborating expert evidence was founded on an incomplete history, the cumulative effect may render the verdict unsafe. The Fowler cogency test (whether evidence is sufficiently cogent to justify conviction) and the M v The Queen test may involve different inquiries, but this was left unresolved.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 3 later cases that cite this judgment.