In South Australia, the principles governing inconsistent verdicts apply not only to cases involving differing verdicts in the strict sense but also to cases where the jury has been unable to reach agreement on one or more counts, as an aspect of the broader ground of unreasonableness under s 353(1) of the Criminal Law Consolidation Act 1935 (SA). However, the caution with which those principles are applied will be particularly apposite in the case of asserted inconsistency arising from a jury's inability to agree. The question of whether a failure to reach a verdict should be equated with a verdict of not guilty for inconsistency purposes remains not finally resolved, with [name withheld] expressing a contrary view.
The full text is available to signed-in members.