Evidence of flight from the scene of a crime cannot be left to the jury as evidence of consciousness of guilt of a specific offence (here, murder) where the flight is equally consistent with consciousness of guilt of lesser offences also charged on the indictment. In circumstantial cases, the jury's verdict is not rendered unreasonable merely because expert evidence on the ultimate issue was equivocal, where the jury was entitled to draw its own inferences from the primary data and subsidiary expert opinions. The question whether an appellate court must form its own view on guilt before assessing whether the verdict was open to the jury was left as a point of divergence between the judges.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 9 later cases that cite this judgment.
3 of the 9 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.