Where evidence of a prior complaint by a complainant in a sexual offence case is admitted but not treated as a recent complaint, the trial judge must still direct the jury that such evidence is not evidence of the facts in issue. The fact that a prior statement was not treated as a recent complaint does not render such a direction unnecessary. The observation that the Suresh formulation may be ambiguous in this context is relevant to the framing of such directions.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 5 later cases that cite this judgment.
1 of the 5 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.