Where evidence led in support of a count on which there is a directed acquittal or on which the accused is not charged depicts the accused as a person who condoned or encouraged sexual abuse of children, a specific direction on the limited use of that evidence and a warning against propensity reasoning is required, and the failure to give such a direction will not be saved by the proviso where the court cannot determine the extent to which the jury's reasoning was influenced by the impermissible evidence. An adequate Markuleski direction need not follow any particular formula but must sufficiently draw the jury's attention to the need to consider whether doubt about a complainant's credibility on one count bears upon credibility on other counts.
The full text is available to signed-in members.