A trial judge's conflation of tendency evidence directions (s 97) with coincidence evidence directions (s 98) may not constitute reversible error where the misdirection was favourable to the accused by imposing additional requirements. An insufficiently emphatic Longman warning regarding delay in complaint constitutes error, but the proviso may apply where the complainant's evidence is compelling and the appellate court is satisfied beyond reasonable doubt of guilt on the record.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 9 later cases that cite this judgment.
1 of the 9 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.