Singh v The King

[2025] VSCA 247

Victorian Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Criminal Law
2. › Appeal
3. › Conviction
4. › Unreasonable verdict
5. › Whether verdicts unreasonable or cannot be supported having regard to the evidence
6. › Inconsistencies in complainant's evidence
7. › Rape by failing to withdraw
8. › Sex worker in commercial setting
9. › Criminal Procedure Act 2009 (Vic), s 276(1)(a)
1. Criminal Law
2. › Appeal
3. › Conviction
4. › Miscarriage of justice
5. › Incompetence of counsel
6. › Whether defence counsel's decision to play recording to complainant causing distress constituted material irregularity
7. › Whether substantial miscarriage of justice resulted
1. Criminal Law
2. › Appeal
3. › Conviction
4. › Miscarriage of justice
5. › Discharge of jury
6. › Pre-trial publicity
7. › Whether newspaper article published during trial required discharge of jury
8. › Whether disjointed cross-examination required discharge of jury
9. › Efficacy of judicial directions to jury
1. Criminal Law
2. › Sexual offences
3. › Rape
4. › Consent
5. › Withdrawal of consent during sexual penetration
6. › Whether complainant communicated withdrawal of consent
7. › Whether accused had reasonable belief in consent
8. › Crimes Act 1958 (Vic), ss 35A, 36, 36A, 38

Quick Take

Where a complainant's first contemporaneous account of sexual intercourse contains no suggestion of communicated withdrawal of consent, and subsequent versions progressively add critical detail contradicted by objective evidence, a conviction for rape by failing to withdraw may be unreasonable.