The case illustrates a significant judicial disagreement about the sufficiency of circumstantial evidence where digital exhibits (floppy disks) have been in police custody without continuity evidence for an extended period. The majority held that the mere theoretical possibility of deliberate misconduct based on opportunity alone does not prevent a jury from being satisfied beyond reasonable doubt, while the dissent held that the easily alterable nature of digital media and the absence of evidence about handling at the Computer Crime Section meant the inference was not the only rational one available. The case also confirms that a direction on possession of child pornography must require the jury to be satisfied the accused knew or suspected the pornographic images were stored on the disks, not merely that the accused knew they possessed the disks.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 3 later cases that cite this judgment.
2 of the 3 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.