Where evidence of one complainant's allegations is not admissible as tendency or coincidence evidence in the trial of counts involving another complainant (due to the possibility of concoction), the wholesale admission of each complainant's full history of sexual misconduct as 'context' evidence at a joint trial creates impermissible prejudice that cannot be cured by directions. The fact that each complainant is a witness to one count involving the other does not justify admitting the entirety of each complainant's uncharged acts evidence. Even where some evidence of other sexual misconduct may be admissible as part of the same transaction, the trial judge must consider rejection under s 137 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW).
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 9 later cases that cite this judgment.