The case confirms that in multiple sexual offence cases against a single complainant, acquittals on some counts are rationally explicable by reference to differences in the quality of evidence supporting each count (such as the presence or absence of corroborating DNA evidence, ambiguity in the complainant's account, or failure to establish a particular element), without undermining the guilty verdicts on other counts. The focus of the inconsistent verdict inquiry remains on finding rational explanations for the acquittals, not the convictions.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 18 later cases that cite this judgment.
4 of the 18 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.