Lynch v The Queen

The applicant, Lynch, sought leave to appeal against his conviction by a jury for two counts of sexual intercourse without consent. The appeal was heard by the Full Court of the Supreme Court of South Australia, comprising Grant CJ, Blokland and Hiley JJ.

The primary legal issues before the court were whether the jury's verdicts were unreasonable and unsupported by the evidence presented at trial, and whether the trial judge had erred in their directions to the jury regarding the use of evidence of the complainant's distress. The applicant argued that inconsistencies in the complainant's testimony and discrepancies between her account and other evidence rendered the verdicts unsafe.

The court applied the principles established in *M v The Queen*, which requires an appellate court to make its own independent assessment of the entire evidence. This assessment involves considering whether, despite evidence upon which a jury might convict, it would be dangerous to allow the verdict to stand. The court must give full regard to the jury's primary role and their advantage in observing witnesses, while still critically examining the evidence for any inconsistencies or inadequacies that might lead to a reasonable doubt. In this instance, despite acknowledging some inconsistencies and discrepancies in the complainant's evidence, the court concluded that it was open to the jury to be satisfied of the applicant's guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

Leave to appeal was granted, but the appeal was ultimately dismissed.