An accused is generally bound by the conduct of trial counsel, and where inadmissible evidence is adduced through cross-examination for rational forensic reasons, no miscarriage of justice arises. Evidence given in an earlier trial does not constitute a prior inconsistent statement under ss 21 and 22 of the Evidence Act 1906 (WA) unless there is an actual contradiction between the two sets of evidence.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 1 later case that cites this judgment.