A trial judge who asks 1,337 questions throughout a criminal trial, many of which go beyond clarification and amount to cross-examination of defence witnesses, exceeds the permissible limits and denies the accused a fair trial. An accused is entitled to cross-examine an alternative suspect fully regarding financial situation and motive, and a trial judge errs in restricting such cross-examination on the basis that the suspect's motive has 'all but disappeared'. Failure by defence counsel to lead available evidence of good character, where no valid tactical reason exists for the omission, constitutes a miscarriage of justice.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 5 later cases that cite this judgment.