MAC v Tasmania

The appellant, MAC, was convicted of rape by a jury in Tasmania. The prosecution had also charged MAC with indecent assault, but the jury returned a verdict of not guilty on that charge. The appeal concerned the alleged inconsistency between these verdicts.

The central legal issue before the Full Court of the Supreme Court of Tasmania was whether the jury's verdicts of guilty for rape and not guilty for indecent assault were so inconsistent as to require a new trial. The court was required to consider the nature of the offences and the evidence presented at trial in relation to each charge.

The court reasoned that the jury was entitled to find that the evidence supporting the rape charge was stronger than the evidence supporting the indecent assault charge, even though the charges related to separate incidents. The jury's function is to assess the evidence presented for each charge independently. In this instance, the court found no inherent inconsistency that would vitiate the jury's verdict on the rape charge, particularly as the evidence for each offence was distinct and the jury had been properly directed.

The appeal was dismissed.