N O v The Queen

The appellant, N O, appealed against his conviction for sexual assault, which followed a jury trial in the District Court of New South Wales. The central issue on appeal concerned the alleged unreasonableness and unsupportability of the jury's verdict, particularly in light of differential findings on related charges.

The Court of Criminal Appeal was required to determine whether the jury's verdict was so unreasonable or unsupportable that it could not be supported having regard to the evidence. This involved considering whether there was a logical or rational explanation for any apparent inconsistency in the jury's findings, particularly concerning the credibility of the complainant.

The Court applied the principles governing appeals against jury verdicts, acknowledging that juries are entitled to make differential findings on charges where the evidence may vary or where the credibility of a witness is assessed differently across different counts. In this instance, the Court found that there was a rational basis for the jury's conclusions, even if those conclusions involved acquittals on some charges and a conviction on others. The evidence, when viewed in its entirety, did not demonstrate that the verdict was unsafe or unsatisfactory.

The appeal was accordingly dismissed.