When the prosecution seeks to introduce course of conduct charges after a child complainant has already been cross-examined at a special hearing, the impact on the child of being recalled for further cross-examination is a highly relevant consideration in determining whether the unfairness to the accused can be cured. The legislative policy of protecting child witnesses from the trauma of repeated testimony may render the proposed cure of recalling the complainant unavailable, with the result that the unfairness is incurable and a permanent stay is warranted. The change from single act charges to course of conduct charges constitutes a fundamental change in the character and significance of the evidence, distinguishable from the mere amendment of charges considered in Pollard.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 2 later cases that cite this judgment.
1 of the 2 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.