Evidence of an accused's psychiatric treatment disclosed in the course of a police interview is admissible where it is relevant to the integrity of the interview process, the accused's welfare, or other legitimate forensic purposes, and the mere mention of psychiatric treatment does not carry sufficient prejudice to require exclusion in the exercise of discretion. A single passing reference by a prosecutor to a possible link between psychiatric treatment and offending, unsupported by evidence or further argument, will not ground a discharge of the jury where it is casual and isolated in the context of a lengthy trial.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 1 later case that cites this judgment.