Guilty verdicts on sexual assault counts where the sexual acts are admitted but consent is disputed are not inconsistent with acquittals on other counts where the occurrence of the sexual acts themselves is in dispute. A single ambiguous answer in cross-examination apparently conceding consent does not render a guilty verdict unreasonable where the balance of the evidence, including repeated denials of consent, immediate complaint, medical evidence, and evidence of force, supports the verdict. The scope of re-examination under s 39(a) of the Evidence Act 1995 extends to the whole of a witness's evidence, not just a single answer.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 4 later cases that cite this judgment.
1 of the 4 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.