Evidence of subsequent drug dealings by persons associated with an accused is not admissible to prove the accused's knowledge at the time of an earlier offence unless the Crown can establish both that the drugs came from those associates and that the nature and circumstances of the accused's relationship with them were such that the only rational inference was that the accused knew they were drug traffickers. Where wrongly admitted evidence fundamentally alters the shape of the trial and the accused's forensic choices, the proviso cannot be applied.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 8 later cases that cite this judgment.
2 of the 8 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.