8. The joint reasons in M were the reasons of Mason CJ, Deane, Dawson and Toohey JJ. Their Honours addressed the type of case where, although it is accepted that, as a matter of law, there is evidence to sustain a verdict, nevertheless, it is said that the verdict is unsafe and unsatisfactory. Their Honours said that the question for the Court in such a case is whether the Court thinks that, upon the whole of the evidence, it was open to the jury to be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt of the guilt of the accused. In answering that question, the Court must pay full regard to the fact that the jury has the primary responsibility of determining guilt or innocence and to the fact that the jury has had the benefit of having seen and heard the witnesses (see at 493). A little later in their reasons, their Honours made the point (at 494) that an appeal court can examine the evidence itself and where it contains discrepancies, displays inadequacies, is tainted or otherwise lacks probative force such that the Court, even making full allowance for the advantages enjoyed by the jury, concludes that there is a significant possibility that an innocent person has been convicted, then the Court is bound to set aside a verdict based on that evidence. Their Honours said that the ultimate question is whether the Court thinks upon the whole of the evidence that it was open to the jury to be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the accused was guilty.