A prosecutor's rhetorical question 'why would you not accept her?' in closing address, directed at identifying credibility as the central issue and anticipating defence arguments, does not contravene Palmer v The Queen. A trial judge's mischaracterisation of a prosecutor's address as 'why would she lie?' can be cured by a firm redirection withdrawing the impermissible question and reaffirming the burden of proof, particularly where the charge as a whole correctly directed the jury on onus and standard of proof.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 2 later cases that cite this judgment.