Where s 11 of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1981 (WA) applies, the standard circumstantial evidence direction — that an adverse inference must be the only reasonable inference open — does not apply to the issue of intent. The sole question is whether the jury is satisfied on the balance of probabilities that the accused did not have the intent to sell or supply. If the jury is left in a state of uncertainty (unable to find it more probable than not that the accused lacked intent), the accused has not discharged the onus and s 11 deems the intent to exist. An accused who selectively answers police questions during a search, having been properly cautioned and understanding the right to silence, cannot complain of unfairness in the admission of the answers voluntarily given.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 35 later cases that cite this judgment.
11 of the 35 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.