A Longman warning need not use the word 'dangerous' or any particular formula, provided the substance of the warning makes the jury fully conscious of the disadvantage to the accused from delay, the risk of miscarriage, and the desirability of corroboration. In the Longman context, 'corroboration' is used in its ordinary sense of evidence that confirms or supports, not in the former technical legal sense. A trial judge should not refer to the impact of delay on the prosecution case when giving a Longman warning. Where a trial judge erroneously restricts the jury from using admissible evidence (such as cross-count evidence or uncharged acts evidence), this advantages the accused and does not occasion a miscarriage of justice.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 2 later cases that cite this judgment.
1 of the 2 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.