Where particular uncharged incidents are relied upon as tendency evidence to prove an accused's sexual interest in a complainant, the jury must be directed that they cannot treat those incidents as supporting a finding of sexual interest unless satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that those incidents occurred. A direction merely requiring satisfaction beyond reasonable doubt of the sexual interest itself is insufficient. However, in deciding whether satisfied beyond reasonable doubt of any one incident, the jury may have regard to the whole of the evidence. The proviso may be applied where the tendency evidence is so closely connected to the charged conduct that there is no possibility the jury was not satisfied of it beyond reasonable doubt.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 7 later cases that cite this judgment.
1 of the 7 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.