Where the Crown relies on evidence of an accused's general admissions of sexual conduct with a complainant (not referring to any particular charged act), a trial judge's direction that such evidence 'could properly support the occurrence of the conduct charged and described in the indictment' is sufficient, without an additional direction requiring the jury to be satisfied that the admissions 'relate to or are at least encompassed by the charged conduct'. The anti-tendency direction sufficiently addresses the risk of misuse. Where the evidence includes both general admissions and specific admissions of uncharged acts, the different bases of admissibility recognised in Rolfe v R at [66] and [67] apply to each category respectively.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 1 later case that cites this judgment.
1 of the 1 citing case carries a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.