Barney v R

The applicant in this matter was convicted of twelve counts of sexual offences against his step-daughter, with nine other counts being dismissed. The applicant appealed against the conviction on the basis that the verdicts were unreasonable and inconsistent. The crux of the appeal was whether the jury could have reasonably arrived at a verdict of acquittal on the nine counts, while simultaneously convicting the applicant on the remaining twelve counts.

The appeal hinged on the distinction between reliability and credibility, which was pivotal to the assertion of inconsistent verdicts. The court had to determine whether the jury's decision to acquit on nine counts could be reasonably explained by the evidence presented. The applicant argued that the jury could not have found him guilty on the twelve counts while acquitting him on the remaining nine, given the overlapping nature of the offences.

The court found that the jury could indeed have reasonably acquitted the applicant on the nine counts if they believed that the offences may have occurred outside the dates particularised in the indictments for those counts. The court concluded that there was a rational explanation for the acquittals, which was based on the evidence that some offences may have occurred outside the specified dates. The court held that the jury's verdicts were not inconsistent, and the applicant's appeal was dismissed.

The court made no orders regarding the final outcome of the appeal.