In a multiple count presentment, evidence of flight from police that cannot be attributed to consciousness of guilt of any particular charged offence is incapable of being used as evidence of actual guilt of any specific count. A direction permitting such use is erroneous and, where the case depends on fine analysis of circumstantial evidence, is likely to constitute a substantial miscarriage of justice. The dissent would have applied the proviso where counsel did not object and the trial judge's evidence summary properly confined the flight evidence.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 2 later cases that cite this judgment.