NSW Caselaw
New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal
CITATION : R v Tolmie [2004] NSWCCA 396 HEARING DATE(S) : 21 May 2004 JUDGMENT DATE : 19 November 2004
JUDGMENT OF : Tobias JA at 1; Hulme J at 69; Adams J at 79 DECISION : Appeal against conviction dismissed
CATCHWORDS : Criminal law - Verdict - Multiple offences - One complainant - Whether verdict unreasonable - Whether acquittal on one count is inconsistent with guilty findings on other counts - Whether jury considered complainant's evidence as reliable and accurate - Whether it is consistent to disbelieve the complainant with respect to one count and not another - Verdicts capable of being explained without conclusion that jury disbelieved complainant - s 6 Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW) - Criminal law - Directions to jury - No Markuleski direction given - Whether direction necessary to give - No unfairness Crimes Act 1900 LEGISLATION CITED : Criminal Appeal Act 1912 Criminal Appeal Rules Jones v The Queen (1997) 191 CLR 439 M v The Queen (1994) 181 CLR 487 CASES CITED : MacKenzie v The Queen (1996) 190 CLR 348 MFA v The Queen (2002) 77 ALJR 139 MFA v The Queen (2002) 77 ALJR 139 R v Markuleski (2001) 52 NSWLR 82 PARTIES : Regina Donald James Tolmie FILE NUMBER(S) : CCA 2004/1970; (formerly 60020/04) COUNSEL : A: S Kluss R: E Wilkins SOLICITORS : A: R Hill R: S Kavanagh
LOWER COURT District Court JURISDICTION : LOWER COURT 02/11/0278 FILE NUMBER(S) : LOWER COURT Morgan DCJ JUDICIAL OFFICER :
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate