A trial judge is not required to direct a jury that prior inconsistent statements are not evidence of the truth of their contents where, in the circumstances, there is no real possibility of the jury misusing the statements — particularly where the statements are exculpatory, are not relied upon by the prosecution as proof of truth, and are disavowed by the witnesses. A corroboration warning under s 50 of the Evidence Act 1906 (WA) is not required merely because a witness suffers from a mental illness such as mild schizophrenia; there must be evidence that the condition affects the witness's capacity to give reliable evidence.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 4 later cases that cite this judgment.
2 of the 4 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.