CRIMINAL LAW – Application for extension of time in which to file a notice of appeal – Whether jury’s verdict unreasonable – Applicant convicted of raping a 13 year old child by introducing his penis into her mouth without her consent – Applicant did not dispute that penetration occurred but disputed whether complainant had consented – Complainant gave separate accounts to various witnesses – Complainant gave a VARE interview and was cross-examined at a special hearing – Applicant contended there were inconsistencies in complainant’s account to witnesses, in the VARE and at the special hearing – Whether jury, acting rationally, ought to have entertained a reasonable doubt as to applicant’s guilt – Where complainant gave generally consistent accounts of events regarding the critical aspects of the offending – Any inconsistencies and omissions did not require jury to conclude complainant’s evidence was unreliable or that she lacked credibility – Application for extension of time refused.
Make this part of your paper trail
Save this paper to a shelf, write a review, and keep your own notes.