A single uncharged act can be admissible as context evidence to bridge a temporal gap between two tranches of charged sexual offences, though the Crown faces a significant hurdle in establishing relevance from one act alone. Context evidence is not confined to cases involving grooming, habituation, or failure to complain; it is admissible whenever relevant to a fact in issue, subject to s 137. Evidence capable of constituting both tendency and context evidence may be admitted as context evidence where the Crown does not seek to adduce it for a tendency purpose. The standard of appellate review of s 137 determinations ([name withheld] v The King vs [name withheld] v [name withheld]) remains unresolved.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 14 later cases that cite this judgment.
1 of the 14 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.