Inconsistencies in a child complainant's evidence regarding timing, sequence and peripheral details, and the bizarre or extraordinary nature of alleged sexual conduct, do not of themselves render guilty verdicts unreasonable. The jury's advantage in observing the child witness is capable of resolving doubts arising from such matters. The court's experience is that stealth, opportunism and brazenness are common features of child sexual offending, and the fear of detection does not universally operate as a deterrent.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 6 later cases that cite this judgment.
3 of the 6 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.