In sexual offence cases involving multiple counts based primarily on complainant testimony, a jury's differentiation between guilty and not guilty verdicts may be logically and reasonably explained by the availability of independent corroborative evidence for some counts but not others, consistently with the principle in MFA v The Queen that jurors may require supporting evidence before being satisfied beyond reasonable doubt on the word of a complainant alone. Evidence of partial admissions to unspecified charges is admissible under s 137 where its probative value in rebutting the defence case substantially outweighs the danger of unfair prejudice, with the risk of speculation best addressed by direction rather than exclusion.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 3 later cases that cite this judgment.