The case confirms that where evidence from multiple sources consistently identifies the accused as the aggressor, and it is open to the jury to infer from the accused's possession of a weapon that he had a pre-formed intention, the verdict will not be disturbed as unsafe or unsatisfactory. Statements of deceased complainants admitted under s 93B of the Evidence Act 1977 (Qld) will not be excluded under s 130 merely because the accused cannot cross-examine the makers, provided the trial judge gives appropriate directions on reliability. A trial judge cannot dictate the form of questions asked in cross-examination on criminal history, and the failure to elicit full circumstances of prior offences does not constitute error.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 1 later case that cites this judgment.