A trial counsel's decision not to call an accused with documented cognitive impairment and inconsistent accounts is objectively rational where there is material to challenge the complainant's credibility without the accused's testimony. The Crown may comment on matters reflecting positively on a complainant's credibility, including voluntary return from overseas to give evidence, without this amounting to the impermissible 'why would the complainant lie' reasoning prohibited by Palmer v The Queen.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 1 later case that cites this judgment.