Where an accused claims total lack of recollection and the Crown contends this is a lie, the trial judge may direct the jury that if satisfied the claim is a lie, they may take into account as a factor that the accused did have a recollection of the critical events; this is reasoning from the content of the lie, not impermissible reasoning from the fact of lying to guilt. There is no rule that the non-parole period should be two-thirds of the total effective sentence; the proportion depends on all the circumstances and is a matter of discretion.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 10 later cases that cite this judgment.
3 of the 10 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.