Where dishonesty is the sole element in dispute across multiple theft counts and the evidence and circumstances are identical, acquittals on some counts and convictions on others will be inconsistent and unsafe unless there is a rational basis for distinguishing between the groups. The prosecution's attempt to justify differing verdicts by reference to admissions 'confined' to certain charges, or to repayment patterns, was rejected as unpersuasive. The question whether a retrial can ever be ordered where convictions are quashed solely on the inconsistent verdicts ground was left open.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 5 later cases that cite this judgment.