Riley v The State of Western Australia

The appellant, Riley, sought to appeal against his convictions on Counts 1 and 3 of the indictment in the Court of Appeal of Western Australia. Riley argued that the verdicts of not guilty on Counts 2, 4 and 5 of the indictment rendered the verdicts of guilty on Counts 1 and 3 unreasonable and unsafe. The State of Western Australia opposed the appeal, contending that the jury had properly exercised their discretion in considering each charge separately, and had been appropriately directed by the trial judge.

The court had to determine whether the verdicts of guilty on Counts 1 and 3 were unreasonable and could not be supported, or whether there had been a miscarriage of justice. The appellant submitted that the jury should have found him either guilty of all the offences or not guilty of any of the offences due to the proximity of the events and the lack of independent evidence. The State of Western Australia argued that the jury had properly exercised their discretion in considering each charge separately and had been appropriately directed by the trial judge. The court found that the jury had followed the trial judge's direction and considered each charge separately. The court held that the verdicts on Counts 2, 4 and 5 were explicable due to the lack of independent evidence, and the jury had been properly directed to consider each count separately. The court concluded that the verdicts on Counts 1 and 3 were not unreasonable and could be supported, and there had not been a miscarriage of justice. The appeal was dismissed.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal and upheld the convictions on Counts 1 and 3 of the indictment.