Niehus v The Queen

Niehus appealed against his conviction in the District Court on two counts of sexual assault, having been found not guilty on two other counts. The central issue on appeal was whether the guilty verdicts were unreasonable and unsupported by the evidence, and whether they were necessarily inconsistent with the not guilty verdicts.

The court was required to determine whether a jury, properly instructed and applying their minds to the evidence, could reasonably have reached the conclusion that the appellant was guilty of two counts of sexual assault while simultaneously finding him not guilty of two other counts. This involved considering whether the jury's findings on the different counts were logically tenable.

The Full Court of the Supreme Court of South Australia held that the not guilty verdicts did not necessarily imply that the jury disbelieved the victim's evidence regarding a continuing course of abuse. The court reasoned that a jury might have entertained doubts about the sufficiency or reliability of the evidence pertaining to specific counts, rather than doubting the overall truthfulness of the victim's account. The court noted that the victim provided more detailed evidence in relation to the counts on which the appellant was found guilty, and that the appellant did not give evidence or cross-examine the victim on those specific counts. Consequently, the court concluded that the guilty and not guilty verdicts could stand together, as a reasonable jury, having properly considered the facts, could have arrived at such a determination. The appeal was therefore dismissed.