In sexual offence cases involving evidence of uncharged acts with the same complainant, the trial judge may direct the jury that the evidence can be used to prove an improper sexual relationship or guilty passion, thereby rendering it more likely that the charged offences occurred. This direction does not undermine the required propensity warning. The passage from [name withheld] requiring that the 'only purpose' of uncharged acts evidence is to determine whether a sexual relationship existed does not preclude a direction identifying the specific purpose as proving guilty passion, as this is embraced by the concept of 'sexual relationship'. A full [name withheld] warning is not required where the passage of time is not so great as to prevent adequate testing of the evidence.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 19 later cases that cite this judgment.
1 of the 19 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.