A modified Longman warning that focuses only on the accused's forensic difficulty in adducing contradictory evidence is insufficient; the warning must also highlight the need for the jury to carefully scrutinise the complainant's evidence and be entirely satisfied of its truth and accuracy before relying upon it. A direction on absence of complaint under s 36BD of the Evidence Act 1906 (WA) must be counterbalanced by a direction explaining the relevance of delay to the jury's assessment of the complainant's credibility, particularly where the prosecution case depends entirely on the complainant's evidence.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 1 later case that cites this judgment.
1 of the 1 citing case carries a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.