A trial judge must not direct a jury that a child complainant's persistence in making and adhering to allegations of sexual abuse is itself a reason to accept those allegations as true, as such a direction amounts to an impermissible presumption of guilt inconsistent with the presumption of innocence. Where the case turns on the credibility of the complainant versus the accused, the jury must be directed on the third possibility that they may not be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt, rather than being presented with a binary choice. Inconsistencies in a child complainant's evidence as to the number of occasions of abuse do not necessarily render a verdict unsafe.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 11 later cases that cite this judgment.
1 of the 11 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.