Where a pretext telephone call is admitted as evidence of an admission of generalised sexual abuse rather than of specific charged acts, the trial judge must direct the jury that the call can only be treated as an admission of generalised sexual abuse, and that the jury must be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt before making such a finding. Failure to give such directions constitutes a miscarriage of justice. The equivocal nature of statements in a pretext call does not render the evidence inadmissible, but heightens the requirement for careful and clear directions.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 6 later cases that cite this judgment.
2 of the 6 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.