The M v The Queen test for unreasonable verdicts requires the appellate court to ask whether it was open to the jury to be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt, not whether the appellate court itself would have convicted. Metaphors such as 'solid obstacle' and 'path to conviction' from Shah and Morabito are case-specific illustrations and should not be treated as additional requirements or qualifications of the fundamental test, particularly in cases turning on credibility. The interposition of a defence expert before the close of the prosecution case, even under Practice Note No 2 of 2014, may not be authorised by s 226 of the Criminal Procedure Act 2009 (Vic).
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 2 later cases that cite this judgment.