R v Dupas (No 3)

The Court of Appeal held that the trial judge's directions on identification evidence were inadequate under Domican v The Queen because they failed to identify specific matters that could undermine reliability of each witness's identification, particularly the risk of displacement from media publicity. The Court also held that evidence of post-offence conduct (changing appearance) required an Edwards direction where the prosecution relied on it as consciousness of guilt. While the Court found the pre-trial publicity created significant prejudice, it rejected a permanent stay, holding that the community cannot afford to acknowledge that media has the capacity to render an accused unable to be tried.