Underlying unity sufficient to support coincidence reasoning in sexual offence cases involving multiple complainants may be established by a combination of: the complainants meeting the accused through the same organisation; the offending occurring at the same location while complainants were in the accused's care; and the accused administering medication to each complainant prior to the offending. Evidence that the accused engaged in the same conduct (e.g., giving medication) with non-complainants goes to the weight of the similarity but does not of itself negate cross-admissibility.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 3 later cases that cite this judgment.