Inconsistencies in a child complainant's evidence — including about the circumstances of the offending, whether the child was asleep, and unsupported claims about other witnesses — do not necessarily render a guilty verdict unreasonable where the jury has been properly directed about the weaknesses in the evidence. A jury's return of an alternative verdict on one count may demonstrate careful discrimination rather than unreasonableness. The test remains whether, considering the evidence independently as a whole, there is a significant possibility that an innocent person has been convicted.
The full text is available to signed-in members.