AK v The Queen

The applicant, AK, appealed against his conviction for murder, contending that the jury’s verdict was unreasonable and could not be supported by the evidence. The case was heard by the Court of Appeal in Victoria. The central issue was whether the jury could lawfully find that AK intended to cause a really serious injury, and whether AK himself intended to cause such an injury. Another question was the interpretation of the term ‘really serious injury’ as it pertains to the jury’s determination.

The court examined the authorities, focusing on the role of the jury as the fact-finder and the advantage of their collective deliberative process. The court held that it was open to the jury to conclude that AK intended to cause a really serious injury based on the evidence presented. The jury was entitled to use their ordinary experience and common sense in determining the meaning of ‘really serious injury’. The court concluded that the jury’s verdict was neither unreasonable nor unsupported by the evidence. The court found that AK’s argument did not establish that the jury had failed to properly direct itself in relation to the necessary intention.

The appeal was dismissed, and leave to appeal to the High Court was refused. The conviction for murder was upheld.