A trial judge is entitled to take a jury question at face value rather than speculate about underlying confusion, and a redirection addressing the literal question asked is adequate even if it does not re-explain the interrelationship between the standard of proof and the mens rea of the offence. An Edwards or Zoneff direction is not required where the evidence of an alleged lie was adduced to explain a procedural step (here, why a baggage search was ordered) rather than as consciousness of guilt evidence, and where the Crown did not invite the jury to reason from the lie to guilt.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 2 later cases that cite this judgment.