Forsti v The Queen

The appeal in *Forsti v The Queen* concerned a judge-alone trial where the appellant was convicted on two charges of acts of indecency against a child under 10 years of age. The appellant argued that the guilty verdicts were unsafe and unsatisfactory.

The central legal issue before the appellate court was whether the trial judge, as the finder of fact, was entitled to be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt of the appellant's guilt, notwithstanding alleged discrepancies in the evidence of witnesses and the appellant's own denials. The court had to consider the weight to be given to such discrepancies and the significance of details provided at trial that had not been disclosed to investigating police.

The court reasoned that discrepancies in witness evidence do not necessarily undermine their credibility. The trial judge was entitled to assess the credibility of the witnesses and the appellant, and to consider the appellant's denials in light of all the evidence. The appellate court found that the trial judge had properly considered these matters and was entitled to conclude that the offences were committed beyond reasonable doubt.

Consequently, the appeal was dismissed.