Evidence of a deceased's psychiatric history is not relevant to a defence of accident unless it reveals a pattern of conduct (such as physical violence or self-harm) that would render the accused's account of the fatal incident more plausible. A trial lawyer's decision not to adduce such evidence, where it lacks probative value and carries forensic risk, is a legitimate tactical judgment that does not give rise to a miscarriage of justice. The case distinguishes Re Knowles [1984] VR 751 where counsel wrongly believed clearly relevant evidence was inadmissible.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 2 later cases that cite this judgment.
1 of the 2 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.