R v KRL

The appeal was heard in the High Court of Australia by Bell, Keane, Nettle, and Gordon JJ. The appellant was convicted of six sexual offences against his daughter and appealed on the grounds that the conviction was unreasonable and not supported by the evidence. The appeal against sentence was not pursued. The daughter, who was the complainant in the case, alleged that the offences occurred over a period of about four years, starting when she was 11 years old. She gave evidence at trial and was cross-examined. The appellant gave evidence and was cross-examined at length. The jury was directed about the evaluation of the evidence and the appellant's defence of mistaken belief. The appellant argued that the conviction was unreasonable because the jury must have entertained a doubt as to the guilt of the appellant. The appellant submitted that the evidence was insufficient to support the conviction and that the appeal was against the conviction, not the sentence.

The court found that the appeal was against the conviction only and the conviction was not unreasonable. The court found that there was no evidence to support the appellant's claim that the jury must have entertained a doubt as to the guilt of the appellant. The court found that the jury was properly directed and that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction. The court found that the conviction was supported by the evidence and was not unreasonable. The appeal was dismissed. The court did not make any orders.