Where evidence is cross-admissible between counts concerning different complainants in a sexual offence trial, a propensity direction must address the impermissible use of evidence of charged acts as well as uncharged acts. A direction confined to uncharged acts is insufficient where the cross-examination and evidence invite propensity reasoning from charged acts concerning one complainant to counts concerning another. The failure to give such a direction will not be saved by the proviso where the court cannot be satisfied that no substantial miscarriage of justice actually occurred.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 16 later cases that cite this judgment.