DH v The Queen

The applicant, DH, appealed against his conviction for sexual offences against four victims, aged between 5 and 15. The case was heard by a judge alone, and DH was convicted on seven counts while acquitted on five. The primary issue before the court was whether the verdicts of guilt were unreasonable given the evidence presented. The applicant argued that the evidence had been fabricated, contending that the complainants' failure to testify about a physical abnormality in him undermined their credibility.

The court addressed the reliability of the evidence and the judge's assessment of the complainants' honesty. It found that the evidence from three complainants was reliable and corroborated by other evidence. The court held that the failure of the complainants to mention the physical abnormality did not necessarily render the verdicts unreasonable. The judge's assessment that the complainants were credible witnesses was upheld, and the appeal against conviction was dismissed.

The reasoning of the court was grounded in the judge's evaluation of the complainants' credibility and the consistency of their testimonies. The court confirmed that the evidence supported the verdicts, and the judge's findings were not illogical or unreasonable. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, and DH's convictions were affirmed. The court found no basis to interfere with the judge's conclusions, thereby upholding the verdicts of guilt.