Corroboration in the context of accomplice evidence is not accorded a narrow or technical meaning; it encompasses any evidence which confirms, supports or strengthens the accomplice's testimony, whether direct or circumstantial. A trial judge's erroneous distinction between corroborative evidence and circumstantial supporting evidence will not necessarily occasion a miscarriage of justice where the jury received strong and repeated accomplice warnings and comprehensive circumstantial evidence directions.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 7 later cases that cite this judgment.