When assessing the adequacy of a Longman warning, the court will examine whether each alleged forensic disadvantage is causally connected to the substantial delay in complaint. Forensic disadvantages that would have existed regardless of any delay (such as loss of DNA evidence within hours, or inability to recall details after any modest delay) do not support a claim that the Longman warning was inadequate. Where the accused does not give evidence of particular forensic disadvantage, the only prejudice reasonably to be presumed or inferred from the delay is that which the trial judge identified in the directions.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 18 later cases that cite this judgment.
12 of the 18 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.