Evidence of post-offence conduct, including subsequent criminal conduct, is admissible where it is probative of the accused's involvement in and dishonesty regarding the charged offences. The mere fact that later conduct is itself criminal does not render it irrelevant or inadmissible. Where a trial judge wrongly concludes evidence is irrelevant, a subsequent s 137 balancing exercise is vitiated. The Crown should identify anticipated evidentiary challenges before jury empanelment to avoid the need for interlocutory appeals under s 5F(3A).
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 5 later cases that cite this judgment.
2 of the 5 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.