In multi-complainant sexual offence cases, generalised similarities such as the accused's position of trust, the complainants' similar ages, and the offending occurring in similar contexts are insufficient to establish cross-admissibility of all evidence across all counts. The Pfennig test requires a strong degree of probative force arising from an underlying pattern in the specific mode of offending, and significant differences in the conduct alleged (such as between a rape preceded by escalating sexual activity and a sudden rape in a different location) preclude formulation of such a pattern. Where evidence is not wholly cross-admissible, jury directions on the limits of admissibility are required, and separate trials may be necessary where directions alone cannot adequately address the prejudice.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 4 later cases that cite this judgment.
2 of the 4 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.