R v D, WD

The case of R v D, WD concerned an appeal against convictions for various sexual offences. The appeal was heard by Anderson, Peek and Nicholson JJ.

The central legal issues before the court were whether the convictions for unlawful sexual intercourse on counts 3 and 4 were unsafe or unsatisfactory, and whether the indictment was so uncertain or ambiguous as to constitute a miscarriage of justice. The court also considered its powers on appeal to substitute verdicts for lesser offences.

The court reasoned that while the evidence might not have been sufficient to sustain the convictions for unlawful sexual intercourse, it was sufficient to support verdicts of indecent assault. The court found that the indictment, while potentially lacking in precision, did not create a miscarriage of justice in relation to the convictions that were upheld. Applying its powers under the relevant legislation, the court determined it was open to substitute the lesser verdicts.

Consequently, the appeal was allowed in part. The appeals against counts 1 and 2 were dismissed. However, the appeals against counts 3 and 4 were allowed in part, with the verdicts of guilty of unlawful sexual intercourse being quashed and substituted with verdicts of guilty of indecent assault.