Catchwords

CRIMINAL LAW – APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL AND INQUIRY AFTER CONVICTION – APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL – PARTICULAR GROUNDS – UNREASONABLE OR INSUPPORTABLE VERDICT – WHERE APPEAL DISMISSED – appellants convicted of rape where the complainant asserted she was so affected by alcohol and cannabis that she was unable to consent – appellants claimed they had obtained the complainant’s consent prior to sexual intercourse – complainant denied any such conversation taking place – both appellants knew the complainant had ingested alcohol and cannabis – whether on the whole of the evidence it was open to the jury to find a lack of consent by the complainant

CRIMINAL LAW – APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL AND INQUIRY AFTER CONVICTION – APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL – PARTICULAR GROUNDS – IMPROPER ADMISSION OR REJECTION OF EVIDENCE – prosecutor obtained leave to cross-examine a prosecution witness regarding a prior statement – defence counsel did not object in the context of allowing the prosecutor to interview the witness – judge apparently misunderstood this lack of objection as authorising cross-examination – evidence admitted in prosecutor’s cross-examination entirely consistent with defence case – whether prosecutor’s suggestion that witness had given conflicting evidence at trial and in statement tended to discredit the witness – whether judge erred in permitting cross-examination – whether that error caused a miscarriage of justice

CRIMINAL LAW – APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL AND INQUIRY AFTER CONVICTION – APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL – PARTICULAR GROUNDS – MISDIRECTION AND NON-DIRECTION – GENERAL MATTERS – PRESENTATION OF DEFENCE CASE AND CROWN CASE AND REVIEW OF EVIDENCE – defence case put possibility that consensual sex occurred which the complainant subsequently regretted and therefore exaggerated her level of intoxication – whether the judge erred in not putting the defence of mistake of fact to the jury