The Liberato direction on competing versions is not required where the summing up, read as a whole, does not invite the jury to choose between the complainant and the accused but instead keeps the burden of proof beyond reasonable doubt in the forefront. The Crown Prosecutor's raising of the absence of motive to lie will not necessarily cause a miscarriage of justice if the matter is not given prominence and the jury is told not to speculate. Where motive to lie is raised by the defence, the additional Uhrig direction (that rejection of the suggested motive does not mean the complainant is telling the truth) should normally be given where the accused personally raises the motive, but is not so compelling where the motive emerges from another witness or in a half-hearted manner. Identification directions under ss 116 and 165 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) are not required where identification is not genuinely in issue.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 14 later cases that cite this judgment.
3 of the 14 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.