The strict logical interpretation of Shepherd v R — distinguishing between 'strands in a cable' (accumulation of detail) and 'links in a chain' (sequential reasoning), with only indispensable links in sequential reasoning requiring proof beyond reasonable doubt — continues to apply in Victoria, notwithstanding passages in Gipp v R and Penney v R that might suggest a wider class of additional facts requiring proof to that standard. Domican identification warnings are not required for expert or quasi-expert evidence of examination and comparison of objects (such as firearms comparison); such warnings are confined to evidence of recognition of objects observed briefly, when moving, or under adverse conditions. An Edwards direction is not required where lies by the accused are used not as an implied admission of guilt but as part of the introductory facts showing preparation for the offence. An aggregation of individually insufficient defects in a trial judge's charge can amount to a miscarriage of justice.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 137 later cases that cite this judgment.
20 of the 137 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.