R v PBA

The appellant, who was found guilty by a jury of maintaining an unlawful sexual relationship with a child under 16 years, six counts of unlawfully and indecently dealing with a child under 16 years, and two counts of rape, sought an appeal against his conviction on the grounds that the verdict was unreasonable having regard to the evidence. The jury were unable to agree upon their verdicts upon three further counts of rape. The appellant argued that there was evidence of coaching in the complainant’s evidence, inconsistencies between the complainant’s evidence and other witnesses’ evidence, and that the complainant admitted in cross-examination that one of the charged offences could not have occurred. The appellant also submitted that two potential witnesses were not called.

The court was required to decide whether the appellant's appeal against his conviction should be allowed. The court considered whether there were any inconsistencies or other issues with the complainant’s evidence that would render the verdict unreasonable. The court found that there was no evidence of coaching and that the inconsistencies in the complainant’s evidence were not sufficient to render the verdict unreasonable. The court also noted that the complainant's mother had questioned her repeatedly, which was a factor the jury could have considered. The court concluded that there was no reasonable basis for a conclusion that there was a reasonable doubt whether the appellant committed any of the offences of which he was convicted.

The appeal was dismissed. The court found that the evidence supported the jury’s verdict, and that there were no reasonable doubts about the appellant’s guilt. The convictions were upheld, and the appeal was dismissed in its entirety.