Evidence of flight from police may be admitted as consciousness of guilt evidence even where the accused offers an alternative explanation for the flight, provided the jury is properly directed that they must be satisfied the only reason for fleeing was consciousness of guilt of the offence charged. There is no general principle requiring exclusion of flight evidence merely because the accused's explanation for flight reveals prior dealings with police or other potentially prejudicial material. Post-flight conduct such as concealing a vehicle is relevant to assessing whether the flight was genuinely motivated by consciousness of guilt.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 16 later cases that cite this judgment.
2 of the 16 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.