An expert report that fails to explain the tests administered, their reliability, the reasoning process leading to the opinion, and the meaning of the conclusions used is inadmissible as no more than an unexplained and unsubstantiated statement of opinion. Where the prosecution relies on uncharged acts to show sexual interest in a particular complainant, expert evidence about the absence of a general 'sexually deviant preoccupation' may not be relevant to the facts in issue.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 9 later cases that cite this judgment.
5 of the 9 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.