Rajwinder Singh, the man convicted of murdering Queensland woman Toyah Cordingley, has had his appeal against his conviction and sentence heard in Brisbane, with the Court of Appeal now considering whether the original trial and sentencing involved errors.

Singh was convicted in December 2025 of murdering 24-year-old Cordingley, whose body was discovered at Wangetti Beach, north of Cairns, in October 2018. She had gone to the beach to walk her dog and failed to return home. Her father discovered her body the following day.

Following a four-week retrial, a jury found Singh guilty. He was sentenced to life imprisonment, with a non-parole period of 25 years. That period was five years longer than the statutory minimum, reflecting the circumstances of the crime and the sentencing judge’s assessment of its seriousness.

During the appeal hearing on 13 October 2026, Singh’s barrister, Saul Holt KC, challenged several aspects of the original trial. One major issue concerned the removal of a juror partway through the proceedings.

The court heard that the trial judge received a note from another juror alleging that the individual was conducting an independent investigation and was biased against police. The judge subsequently dismissed that juror but retained the remaining jury members.

Singh’s defence argued that the allegations should have been investigated more thoroughly before the decision was made. His barrister submitted that failing to make further inquiries risked compromising the fairness of the proceedings and raised questions about whether the jury had been properly managed.

The defence also challenged the arrangements during a jury visit to Wangetti Beach, arguing that jurors had separated into smaller groups and might not have received the same information. Prosecutors disputed that this created an irregularity, maintaining that the jurors remained under court supervision.

Another ground of appeal concerned the sentence. Singh’s legal team argued that the 25-year non-parole period was excessive and should be reduced. The prosecution opposed the appeal, defending both the trial judge’s decisions and the severity of the sentence.

Cordingley’s mother, Vanessa Gardiner, attended the hearing and became visibly distressed as the circumstances of her daughter’s death were discussed. The hearing brought renewed attention to the lasting impact of the crime on her family.

The appeal does not mean Singh has been acquitted or that his conviction has been overturned. His conviction and sentence remain in place unless the Court of Appeal orders otherwise.

Three appeal judges will consider the arguments before delivering their decision. The court may dismiss the appeal or grant relief if it determines that the legal grounds have been established. A decision could take several weeks.

The case has attracted significant public attention in Queensland because of the length of the investigation, Singh’s departure for India after the murder, his subsequent extradition to Australia and the lengthy legal proceedings that followed.

The appeal is now the next stage in the case. Its outcome will determine whether Singh’s conviction and sentence stand or whether any changes are required under the law.