Where a complainant's evidence is internally inconsistent on a specific element (here, penetration), and earlier statements to police are either silent on or contradict that element, a jury's acquittal on the substantive offence but conviction on the statutory alternative of attempt is not inconsistent and does not indicate impermissible compromise. The quality of the complainant's evidence may properly differ between the substantive offence and the attempt where the inconsistency relates only to the distinguishing element.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 22 later cases that cite this judgment.
9 of the 22 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.