Fernando v The Queen

The appellant, Fernando, appealed against his conviction for sexual crimes before the High Court of Australia. The appellant was convicted of sexual offences by a jury in the Supreme Court of Victoria. The jury returned a verdict of guilty on one count of sexual penetration without consent and not guilty on two other counts of sexual penetration without consent. The appeal focused on the consistency and reasonableness of the jury's verdicts.

The central legal issues before the court were whether the jury's verdicts were inconsistent or unreasonable, and if the trial judge's directions to the jury were adequate. The appellant argued that the jury's verdicts were inconsistent and unreasonable because they could not logically be reconciled. The respondent contended that the jury's verdicts were within the range of reasonable possibilities and that the trial judge's directions were sufficient.

The court considered the principle that different jury verdicts on different counts in the same trial do not necessarily indicate inconsistency. The High Court found that the jury's verdicts, though seemingly inconsistent, were not unreasonable. The court emphasised that the jury is entitled to consider each count separately and to acquit a defendant on some counts while convicting on others if there is a reasonable doubt. The court concluded that the jury's verdicts were within the range of reasonable possibilities, and the trial judge's directions were adequate. The appeal was dismissed.