R v Ua

In the case of R v Ua, the appellant was convicted of two counts of indecent dealing and one count of permitting himself to be indecently dealt with by a child under the age of 12, who was also a lineal descendant of the appellant. The matter was heard in the Queensland Court of Appeal. The appellant sought to appeal against his conviction on the grounds that the jury placed undue weight on the evidence given by the complainant under sections 21AK and 93A of the Evidence Act 1977 (Qld) and that the evidence was inconsistent. The appellant further argued that his conviction was unjust and contrary to the law.

The court was required to determine whether the jury's verdict was unreasonable or insupportable and whether it was unjust or contrary to the law. The appellant submitted that the jury placed undue weight on the complainant's evidence and failed to consider other evidence presented at the trial. The court considered the evidence and submissions made by the parties and found that the jury's verdict was not unreasonable or insupportable. The court held that the jury was entitled to accept the complainant's evidence and that there was no inconsistency in the evidence that would warrant a new trial.

The appeal against conviction was dismissed, and the application for leave to appeal against sentence was refused. The court held that the jury's verdict was open to them on the evidence before them, and there was no miscarriage of justice. The appellant's argument that the jury placed undue weight on the complainant's evidence was rejected, and the conviction was upheld. The court did not find any error in the trial judge's directions to the jury or in the sentence imposed.