The question for an appellate court on an unsafe and unsatisfactory verdict ground is whether it was open to the jury to be satisfied of guilt beyond reasonable doubt, which is to say whether the jury 'must', as distinct from might, have entertained a doubt about the appellant's guilt. It is not sufficient to show that there was material which might have been taken by the jury to be sufficient to preclude satisfaction of guilt to the requisite standard.
An error in the statement of offence in an indictment that refers to the offence as amended rather than as it stood at the time of the alleged offending does not invalidate the indictment where the particulars clearly confine the charge to the correct elements, and the error does not cause the trial to miscarry. Submissions that defence counsel was misled by such an error require evidentiary support, not mere conjecture.
No headnote yet — we'll generate the full structured AI headnote for you.
Generate the headnoteFree trial · no card required
Legal principles extracted from this case
Cases considered by Ashley v The Queen
Cases that have considered Ashley v The Queen
Judicial Consideration (Chronological)