When evidence of prior uncharged criminal conduct is admitted as 'background evidence' rather than tendency evidence, the trial judge must consider the risk that the jury will engage in impermissible tendency reasoning as a material consideration in the s 137 weighing exercise, and must give clear warnings against such reasoning both when the evidence is admitted and in the summing up. Any characterisation of evidence of prior criminal conduct as 'background' or 'context' should sound a warning of the need for careful attention to the risk of tendency reasoning. Cross-examination of an expert witness that places before the jury the inadmissible hearsay opinion of another expert on a critical issue is improper and may warrant quashing a conviction.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 11 later cases that cite this judgment.
3 of the 11 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.