Similar fact evidence that is admissible to identify the accused as the perpetrator is not necessarily admissible to prove intent to kill; the Pfennig test must be applied separately to each purpose for which the evidence is tendered. Where similar fact evidence is admitted, the trial judge must give a clear, precise and strong warning as to the limited use that may be made of it, and failure to do so is an error of law warranting a new trial. Post-offence conduct alone is insufficient to establish murder or manslaughter where there is another plausible explanation for that behaviour.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 5 later cases that cite this judgment.
1 of the 5 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.