Where an inconsistency arises between defence counsel's opening address and the accused's evidence, the trial judge must direct the jury that there are explanations for the inconsistency other than that the accused changed his story, applying the principles in R v Birks. The seniority or experience of defence counsel does not relieve the trial judge of this obligation. The scope of the Zoneff direction in cases where credibility is attacked through alleged lies (but without express reliance on consciousness of guilt) was left open.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 17 later cases that cite this judgment.
7 of the 17 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.