The rapid return of unanimous verdicts after a weekend adjournment following the discharge of a juror during deliberations does not, without more, support an inference that the discharged juror would have voted for acquittal. Claimed discrepancies in a complainant's evidence concerning peripheral details — such as the precise date of occupancy of premises and the presence of particular equipment — do not render verdicts unreasonable where the evidence does not incontrovertibly rebut the complainant's account and the jury was well-placed to resolve such conflicts. An argument from a single sentencing precedent is of little weight in establishing manifest excess.
The full text is available to signed-in members.