Discusses the approach of the Australian High Court in Pell v The Queen, in which it quashed a cardinal's conviction for historic sexual assault. Contrasts the UK position in R. v SJ (CA) which held a jury's belief in the complainant's credibility to be determinative, rather than peripheral. Discusses the human rights arguments for extending the right of criminal appeal from jury findings on grounds including the right to a fair trial.
Henry QC, E., & Gray, C. (2020). Cardinal Pell's appeal to the High Court of Australia: challenging the limits of a defendant's right to appeal the facts of a criminal conviction. European Human Rights Law Review, 2020(4), 317-329. https://uk.westlaw.com/Document/IABB321F0F3C211EA9DA082C6192D6961/View/FullText.html?originationContext=document&transitionType=SearchItem&contextData=(sc.Search)&navigationPath=Search%2Fv1%2Fresults%2Fnavigation%2Fi0ad6ad3a00000174ba655c3f0c0932f0&listSource=Search&listPageSource=09282d89f89b02cea34dc3a5cea0c13d&list=UK-JOURNALS-PUBLICATION&rank=1&comp=wluk&navId=6B2CD3690554809A059AE06DA8D73E22