R v L (CA274/07)

In the Court of Appeal of New Zealand, the case of R v L (CA274/07) was heard by O'Regan, Potter, and Keane JJ. The appellant, a 74-year-old man, was convicted of raping his 12-year-old niece, X, during the 1970 Christmas holidays. The appellant was acquitted of indecently assaulting X's older sister at an earlier time. The primary issue before the court was whether the jury could reasonably convict the appellant based on X's testimony despite certain inconsistencies.

The court was tasked with determining whether the discrepancies in X's testimony regarding the timing of the offence, the employment status of the appellant's wife, and the identity of her teacher were significant enough to cast doubt on her credibility and the reliability of her account. The appellant argued that these inconsistencies indicated uncertainty and unreliability, which should have led to a reasonable doubt. The Crown, however, maintained that despite these minor inaccuracies, X's overall testimony was truthful and credible.

The court found that the first challenge regarding the timing of the offence was resolved when the indictment was amended to reflect the correct period based on school records. The third challenge, concerning the employment of the appellant's wife, was deemed inconsequential as it did not significantly impact the credibility of X's account. The second challenge, which involved the timing of the death of the appellant's father-in-law, was the most substantial. However, the court concluded that this discrepancy alone was not enough to undermine X's testimony. The jury, properly directed, found X's evidence to be credible and reliable.

The court dismissed the appeal against the conviction, holding that the jury was entitled to accept X's testimony as truthful and that the inconsistencies did not fatally undermine her account. The conviction was upheld, and the appeal was dismissed.