R v di Pino

The case of R v di Pino involved the appellant, who was convicted on two counts of unlawfully and indecently dealing with female complainants. The Court of Appeal was tasked with determining whether the differing verdicts were irreconcilable, the safety of the verdicts of guilty, and whether the jury should have been directed to consider reasonable doubt in respect of the complainant's evidence in assessing her credibility. The appellant challenged his conviction and sentence, arguing that the jury should have been directed to take reasonable doubt into account when assessing the credibility of the complainant's evidence. The Court of Appeal examined whether the jury's verdicts were irreconcilable, considering the differing verdicts on counts 1 and 4. The court held that the verdicts were not irreconcilable as the jury could have found the complainant's evidence on count 1 not proven beyond reasonable doubt, but still believed her account on count 4.

The Court of Appeal also examined whether the verdicts of guilty were unsafe and whether the jury should have been directed to take reasonable doubt into account when assessing the complainant's credibility. The court found that the verdicts were not unsafe, as the jury had been properly directed on the assessment of the complainant's credibility. The court held that there was no error in the trial judge's directions to the jury, and that the jury was properly directed to consider the credibility of the complainant's evidence in light of the reasonable doubt standard. The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal against conviction on count 4, but allowed the appeal against sentence, setting aside the penalty imposed on that count and ordering the appellant to be released from custody forthwith.