In R v Zivkovic [2024] QCA 167, the Court of Appeal in Queensland upheld the conviction of Stephen Zivkovic for one count of rape. The appellant challenged the conviction on the grounds that the verdict was unreasonable given inconsistencies in the complainant's testimony, particularly concerning drug use and events leading up to the incident. Zivkovic, who acknowledged intercourse took place, argued these inconsistencies rendered the complainant unreliable. Additionally, the appellant criticized the trial judge for failing to instruct the jury against erroneously reasoning about the complainant’s alleged absence of a motive to lie. Despite these arguments, the Court found that the complainant's immediate complaints and visible distress after the incident strongly supported the reliability of her testimony. The inconsistencies were deemed minor and insufficient to overturn the verdict. Consequently, the Court dismissed the appeal, ruling that the jury had reasonable grounds to convict based on the evidence presented.
top of page
bottom of page