R v Carter

The case of R v Carter involved an applicant convicted of two counts of committing an indecent act with, or in the presence of, a child under the age of 16, and one count of attempting to take part in an act of sexual penetration with a child under the age of 16. The applicant appealed against his conviction and sentence, raising several issues regarding the direction given to the jury concerning the standard of proof and the inconsistency of the verdicts.

The legal issues before the court included whether the words ‘highest standard known to the law’ must be used when directing the jury as to the standard of proof, whether the criminal standard must be compared with the civil standard, and whether the inconsistency of the verdicts was irreconcilable. Specifically, the applicant argued that counts 6 and 7, which were based on the testimony of the same complainant and relevantly indistinguishable facts, could not produce different verdicts.

The court held that the direction given to the jury was insufficient, as it did not adequately inform them that they must be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt. This was a significant error that could have influenced the jury's decision. Regarding the inconsistency of the verdicts, the court found that the inconsistency was irreconcilable. Consequently, the conviction on count 6 was quashed. The applicant was re-sentenced to a total effective sentence of three years' imprisonment, with a non-parole period of two years and two months.