Where the prosecution seeks to prove a prior inconsistent statement of a defence witness (not the accused) under s 21 of the Evidence Act 1906 (WA), the rule against splitting the prosecution case does not apply and special or exceptional circumstances are not required. The evidence is admissible once the statutory preconditions in s 21 are met, subject to any residual discretion to exclude on grounds of unfairness (which was left open). The question whether s 21 confers a residual discretion to exclude otherwise admissible prior inconsistent statement evidence remains unresolved.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 10 later cases that cite this judgment.