Where the prosecution leads evidence of a particular event (such as a pregnancy scare) as probative of the charged offences, the defence must not be precluded under s 37A from cross-examining on an alternative innocent explanation for that event, even where the complainant has not previously been asked about the alternative explanation. A trial judge exercising the s 37A discretion must focus on the questions proposed, not on anticipated answers. The court also provided a comprehensive catalogue of reasons for delayed complaint in child sexual abuse cases relevant to the s 61(b)(1) direction.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 6 later cases that cite this judgment.
5 of the 6 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.