BG v R

The appellant, BG, was convicted in the County Court of Victoria of three counts of sexual assault against a minor. The conviction was appealed on the grounds that the jury's verdict was unreasonable and that the trial judge misapplied the law in relation to the discharge of a juror. The appeal was heard by the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of Victoria. The primary legal issues before the court were whether the jury's verdict was unreasonable and whether the trial judge erred in law when deciding to discharge a juror and to continue with a jury of eleven.

The court found that the jury's verdict was open to the jury, and that there was no error in the trial judge's decision to discharge a juror. The court held that the trial judge's decision to discharge the juror was not unreasonable, and that the judge properly considered the relevant factors when making the decision. The court also held that the trial judge did not err in law when deciding to continue with a jury of eleven. The court found that the trial judge had considered the relevant factors, including the nature of the offence, the complexity of the evidence, and the importance of a unanimous verdict, and had properly exercised his discretion. The court further held that the trial judge was not required to give reasons for his decision to discharge a juror and to continue with a jury of eleven, but that it was desirable for the judge to do so in the interests of transparency and accountability.

The appeal was dismissed. The conviction and sentence of the appellant were upheld. The court found that the trial judge had properly exercised his discretion in relation to the discharge of a juror and the continuation of the trial with a jury of eleven, and that the jury's verdict was open to them and not unreasonable. The court held that there was no error in law that would warrant the setting aside of the conviction.