Expert witnesses cannot give opinion evidence at trial as to whether an individual complainant's account of sexual assault is a genuine memory or a hallucination, as this usurps the jury's function and goes beyond specialised knowledge under s 79 of the Evidence Act 1995. The assessment of probative value of tendency and coincidence evidence under ss 97 and 98 must be undertaken having regard to other evidence to be adduced, including circumstantial evidence, complaint evidence, and evidence of the absence of a chaperone. A voir dire on admissibility of tendency evidence may properly be confined to the issues relevant to admissibility and does not require open-ended cross-examination of witnesses.
The full text is available to signed-in members.