In cases of multiple counts involving the same victim where evidence on each count is cross-admissible as relationship evidence (rather than similar fact or improbability evidence), a propensity warning is not required; a standard separate consideration direction combined with a direction about the permissible use of relationship evidence will ordinarily suffice. The case is distinguishable from similar fact cases such as Schlaefer where evidence of one victim supports the credibility of another.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 8 later cases that cite this judgment.
3 of the 8 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.