A question in a VARE interview that nominally appears open-ended may nonetheless be a leading question within s 37 of the Evidence Act 2008 (Vic) if it indirectly suggests a particular answer in circumstances where the child has not previously made the allegation in question. Where such a question is admitted, a cautionary direction to the jury may be required. However, the failure to give such a direction will not produce a miscarriage of justice where the evidence is otherwise supported by unambiguous statements in the interview and complaint evidence.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 35 later cases that cite this judgment.
18 of the 35 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.