A Robinson direction in a sexual offence case must go beyond a general instruction to scrutinise the complainant's evidence carefully. The trial judge must independently identify the specific inconsistencies and weaknesses in the prosecution case, rather than merely summarising defence counsel's submissions about those inconsistencies. Failure to do so means the direction does not carry the 'unmistakeable authority of the court' and creates a perceptible risk of miscarriage of justice. A direction that inconsistencies may 'affect' the jury's assessment is insufficient; the direction should convey that inconsistencies may cause the jury to 'doubt' the evidence.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 5 later cases that cite this judgment.
2 of the 5 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.