A trial judge's direction to a jury that it would be 'unusual' for them to reach different conclusions about an accused's credibility on different counts in a multi-count indictment is capable of constituting a misdirection that goes to the root of the proceedings, even where the direction is framed as a matter of 'logic'. Juries must be left free to assess credibility separately on each count and should be directed that they may accept part of a witness's evidence and reject the balance.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 4 later cases that cite this judgment.
1 of the 4 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.