Where a circumstantial Crown case relies on CCTV identification evidence, the absence of the accused's DNA on items worn by the offender, the presence of another person's DNA on those items, and physical features visible in the footage inconsistent with the accused's known features, may together constitute a reasonable hypothesis consistent with innocence that the Crown must exclude. Alternative particularisation of criminal liability as either principal or party may rationally reconcile an acquittal on one count with a conviction on another where the evidentiary basis differs.
The full text is available to signed-in members.