An acquittal on one count of sexual intercourse without consent is not inconsistent with convictions on other counts where the acquittal is rationally explicable by doubt about the accused's knowledge of non-consent (the third element), rather than doubt about the complainant's credibility, particularly where the circumstances of the counts differ significantly. The absence of forensic or medical evidence is of less significance where contemporaneous communications corroborate the complainant's account.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 5 later cases that cite this judgment.