Where tendency evidence of 'guilty passion' is admitted in a sexual offence trial, the jury must be directed: (1) that it is for them to determine the interpretation of the evidence; (2) that if they accept it as tendency evidence, it cannot be used as evidence of guilt on the counts charged; and (3) that it may only be used as evidence supporting the complainant's credibility. Similarly, relationship evidence of uncharged sexual conduct requires directions that the jury cannot reason from a finding of an ongoing sexual relationship to guilt on the specific counts. Failure to give such directions will constitute a misdirection that cannot be cured by the proviso where there is a significant risk the jury used the evidence impermissibly.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 5 later cases that cite this judgment.