The appellant appealed his conviction for aggravated assault, arguing that the verdict was unreasonable.
He contended that the trial judge erred by placing too much reliance on the victim's companion, disregarding expert evidence on the victim's blood alcohol level, and unjustifiably discrediting the evidence of the appellant and his companions.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding that the appellant was merely inviting the court to re-weigh the evidence, and that the trial judge's treatment of the evidence was perfectly reasonable.
