Evidence of an accused's reaction or demeanour when confronted with a confession will rarely be capable of supporting an inference of consciousness of guilt, particularly where the reaction is equally consistent with guilt and innocence. A lie told by an accused about knowing undercover operatives, when the accused did not know they were police, cannot support an inference of consciousness of guilt of the underlying offence. Where the Crown does not rely on particular evidence as consciousness of guilt, the trial judge should not give an Edwards direction in respect of it unless the inference is properly available.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 12 later cases that cite this judgment.
3 of the 12 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.