A prosecutor's assertions in closing address about what is 'usual' in sex offence cases, based on personal experience, constitute impermissible evidence from the Bar table. However, the same point may properly be made by inviting the jury to rely on their own experience and common sense. Inflammatory and emotive language by a prosecutor characterising a complainant (e.g., as a 'monster' or 'malevolent') in response to a defence attack on credibility may not occasion a miscarriage of justice where the trial judge gives appropriate directions and defence counsel does not seek discharge of the jury or specific directions. The significance of defence counsel's failure to object or seek redirection at trial is a relevant factor in assessing whether a miscarriage of justice has occurred.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 6 later cases that cite this judgment.