R v Kellett

The appellant in the case of R v Kellett appealed against his conviction for rape and the sentence imposed. The appellant and the complainant were engaged in consensual sexual acts when the appellant unexpectedly performed a manoeuvre called "fisting" without the complainant's consent. The appellant was convicted on two counts: count 1, rape, and count 2, unlawfully causing grievous bodily harm. The appellant challenged his conviction for rape, arguing that the jury's verdict was unreasonable and could not be supported by the evidence. The court was required to determine whether the verdict was unreasonable, whether there was a misdirection or non-direction regarding the provisions of section 24 of the Criminal Code, and whether the sentence was manifestly excessive or inadequate.

The court found that the jury's verdict was not unreasonable, and the evidence supported the conviction. The court further found that there was no misdirection or non-direction in respect of section 24 of the Criminal Code, as the defence counsel had deliberately chosen not to rely on mistake of fact. Additionally, the court held that the sentence was not manifestly excessive or inadequate, as the sentencing judge had relied on appropriate factors in determining the sentence.

The appeal against conviction was dismissed, and leave to appeal against the sentence was refused. The court's orders were to dismiss the appeal against conviction and refuse leave to appeal against the sentence.