Where a jury acquits on some counts because the complainant's uncorroborated evidence was contradicted by unchallenged evidence, and the remaining counts depend entirely on the same complainant's uncorroborated evidence without any distinguishing feature such as corroboration, the convictions on the remaining counts are unreasonable. The most likely explanation for acquittals — rejection of the complainant's reliability — must be assessed against the evidence supporting the convictions. Verdicts of acquittal rather than a new trial may be entered where this carries forward the logic of the jury's own acquittal verdicts.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 2 later cases that cite this judgment.