R v Par

In the Supreme Court of Victoria, the appellant appealed against convictions of maintaining an unlawful sexual relationship with a child under 16 and three counts of unlawfully and indecently dealing with a child under 16 with circumstances of aggravation. The appellant was acquitted of six other counts of sexual offences. The appellant argued that the not guilty verdicts required the jury to reject the credibility of the complainant, which meant that the offences for which guilty verdicts were returned could not be proved beyond reasonable doubt. The appellant also raised issues regarding the trial judge's handling of the jury, including the composition of the jury and irregularities during the trial.

The court examined the appellant's arguments regarding the jury's composition and irregularities during the trial. The court concluded that the trial judge did not err in undertaking the enquiry into juror number 4. The court found that the trial judge did not act outside their discretion in discharging juror number 4 and replacing her with one of two reserve jurors. The court also found that the errors in the process of enquiry did not result in a miscarriage of justice. The court determined that the proviso was applicable, and there was no substantial miscarriage of justice to warrant the exercise of the court's discretion to dismiss the appeal.

The court dismissed the appeal and affirmed the convictions of the appellant. The court found that the guilty verdicts were not unreasonable or insupportable having regard to the evidence. The court held that the not guilty verdicts did not require the jury to reject the credibility of the complainant, and the guilty verdicts were supported by the evidence. The court concluded that there was no substantial miscarriage of justice to warrant the exercise of the court's discretion to dismiss the appeal. The convictions of the appellant were therefore upheld.