Where an accused is acquitted of some sexual offences and convicted of others arising from the same occasion, the verdicts are not necessarily inconsistent if there is an evidentiary basis for the jury to distinguish between the accused's state of mind at different points during the encounter. An accused's lies denying the occurrence of the acts underlying the charges of conviction provide powerful support for an inference of consciousness of guilt. Prior consistent and prior inconsistent statements admitted under the Evidence Act 2008 (Vic) should not be treated as having equal and opposite probative value on credibility.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 2 later cases that cite this judgment.
1 of the 2 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.