MHS v The State of Western Australia

The appellant, MHS, was convicted by a jury in the Supreme Court of Western Australia on one count of sexual penetration without consent. The appellant was acquitted on all other charges in relation to the same complainant. MHS appealed against the conviction on the ground that the verdicts were inconsistent and that the conviction was unreasonable and unsupported by the evidence. The appeal was heard by the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of Western Australia.

The central issue for the court to determine was whether the verdicts of conviction and acquittal were inconsistent and, if so, whether the conviction was unreasonable or unsupported by the evidence. The court examined whether the evidence in respect of the counts was materially the same and whether the jury could rationally have acquitted the appellant on some counts while convicting on others. The court also considered whether the conviction on the count in question was open on the evidence, even if the verdicts were inconsistent.

The court found that the verdicts were not inconsistent, as they could be rationally explained by the jury's assessment of the evidence in relation to each count. The court held that the evidence in respect of the counts was not materially the same and that the jury could have acquitted the appellant on some counts while convicting on others based on the specific circumstances and credibility of the evidence. The court further determined that the conviction on the relevant count was open on the evidence and was not unreasonable or unsupported. The appeal was therefore dismissed.

The court did not make any orders for costs.