R v Lowe

The appellant, R, was convicted by a jury of attempted murder. He appealed this conviction to the Supreme Court of South Australia, which comprised Peek, Nicholson and Doyle JJ. The appeal concerned the reasonableness of the jury's verdict and the admission of certain evidence.

The primary legal issues before the Court were whether the verdict was unreasonable or insupportable having regard to the evidence, and whether there had been a miscarriage of justice. This included consideration of fresh evidence relating to DNA results, and complaints about the admission of evidence and the content of the summing up, despite no objections being raised at trial.

The Court considered the evidence presented at trial, including the nature of the attack on Ms Clarke, the crime scene, and the identification evidence. The appellant contended that the jury's verdict was unreasonable, and sought to introduce fresh DNA evidence. The Court noted that the sole issue at trial was the identity of the attacker. The Court ultimately found that, despite the "non-recognition" evidence of Ms Clarke, it was open to the jury to accept the evidence of Professor Vink regarding the unreliability of Ms Clarke's memory due to her injuries, and to reject contrary evidence.

The Court granted permission to appeal on several grounds but ultimately dismissed the appeal, finding no substantial miscarriage of justice. Permission to appeal was refused on other grounds.