A covertly recorded telephone conversation between a complainant and an accused, facilitated by police who provide the complainant with prompts, is not necessarily the functional equivalent of an interrogation where the complainant does not exploit special characteristics of the relationship and the accused is free to withdraw. The admissibility turns on whether the accused's freedom to choose to speak has been impugned, assessed by reference to whether the conversation was the functional equivalent of an interrogation and whether the state agent exploited the relationship. Evidence of prior consistent complaints is admissible under s 108(3) of the Evidence Act 1995 to restore a complainant's credibility in anticipation of a suggestion of fabrication.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 32 later cases that cite this judgment.
3 of the 32 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.