A bare denial by an accused that is not given on oath, not tested by cross-examination, and does not put forward an alternative version of events may properly be rejected by a magistrate where the complainant's evidence is otherwise reliable and capable of acceptance beyond reasonable doubt. Inconsistencies in a complainant's evidence that are not individually or collectively significant, and are not substantially explored in cross-examination, do not demonstrate error in a finding of guilt.
The full text is available to signed-in members.