Where a prosecution case depends entirely on the uncorroborated evidence of a complainant whose testimony contains significant inconsistencies, a trial judge must do more than make a brief passing reference to those inconsistencies; the judge must specifically identify the inconsistencies and direct the jury as to their significance for credibility. Directions on separate consideration of counts must not be framed so as to positively suggest that credibility doubts arising from one count cannot be taken into account when considering another count. The Markuleski direction has particular relevance in uncorroborated evidence cases.
The full text is available to signed-in members.