A trial judge's supplementary directions to a jury may be animated and emphatic without necessarily overawing the jury or amounting to impermissible comment, provided the directions make clear that the decision is for the jury and comments are identified as such. Where the evidence of intent is overwhelming (here, seizing a knife, grabbing the complainant by the hair, and stabbing/slashing his back), any deficiency in supplementary directions will not occasion a substantial miscarriage of justice because conviction is inevitable. A direction that effectively instructs the jury that intent is a foregone conclusion once the physical act is established is erroneous as it approaches the abolished presumption that a person intends the natural consequences of their acts, but may be saved where surrounded by correct instructions.
The full text is available to signed-in members.