Where an indictment contains multiple counts arising from a single incident, differences in the availability of corroborating evidence (medical evidence, complaint evidence, DNA evidence) for different counts can provide a rational explanation for guilty verdicts on some counts and acquittals on others, such that the verdicts are not inconsistent. The absence of complaint evidence regarding a particular count is a relevant factor supporting the rationality of an acquittal on that count.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 2 later cases that cite this judgment.