In inconsistent verdict appeals, doubts about a complainant's reliability (accuracy of recall) are less likely to taint the entirety of their evidence than doubts about credibility (truthfulness). Acquittals can be rationally explained by evidence that offences may have occurred outside the date ranges particularised on the indictment, without undermining the complainant's general credibility or reliability. The key question is whether the acquittals are attributable only or principally to doubt about the complainant's credibility, or whether there is a rational explanation specific to the evidence on each count.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 13 later cases that cite this judgment.
8 of the 13 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.