Where the Crown relies on a pattern of conduct connecting an accused to multiple offences (such as threats followed by fires at the premises of those who refused to comply), the evidence may be cross-admissible under s 398A without demonstrating 'striking similarity' or 'signature' in the manner of commission of the offences. The test remains whether it is just to admit the evidence despite its prejudicial effect, assessed in the context of all the evidence. An inadvertent reference to the 'balance of probabilities' in a jury charge will not give rise to a substantial miscarriage of justice where the charge as a whole repeatedly and clearly directs the jury on the criminal standard of proof beyond reasonable doubt.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 7 later cases that cite this judgment.