A direction under s 102(b) of the Evidence Act 1977 (Qld) should not be given where there is no evidence of circumstances from which an inference can reasonably be drawn that the complainant had any incentive to conceal or misrepresent facts. If such a direction is given unnecessarily, it may constitute a miscarriage of justice unless accompanied by a corrective direction that the absence of incentive does not establish truthfulness. Prosecutors may invite juries to draw inferences about a child complainant's naivety from the evidence, including the complainant's demeanour, but should be circumspect in using rhetorical questions that might be perceived as reversing the onus of proof.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 1 later case that cites this judgment.