Cross-examination questions asking an accused whether Crown witnesses fabricated evidence, had motives to lie, or whether consistent identifications were coincidental remain impermissible under Palmer v R and related authorities. However, the proviso may be applied where the accused's answers were firm and unshaken, the impermissible questions formed a minor part of the trial, the summing up was correct, and the accused's own case was that the witnesses were fabricating. The test for admissibility of photographic identification evidence remains whether, on the whole of the evidence, the verdict ought not to stand because a miscarriage of justice occurred, not whether the identification was conducted with propriety and fairness.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 1 later case that cites this judgment.