A trial judge who declines to give a s 165 warning must state reasons, whether the refusal is based on a finding that the relevant paragraph of s 165(1) is not established or on the exercise of the s 165(3) discretion. A dismissive conclusory assertion merely repeating the words of the statute is insufficient. Evidence of flight may be admitted as consciousness of guilt even where the accused faces unrelated charges, provided the accused has alternative explanations for the flight.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 14 later cases that cite this judgment.
5 of the 14 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.