Expert evidence about how autism spectrum disorder combined with intellectual impairment affects a complainant's ability to record and recount past events is admissible as going beyond ordinary juror experience, even though evidence about the effects of low intelligence alone may not be. Where such evidence is properly admitted and the trial judge adequately directs the jury on their role in assessing credibility and the purpose of the expert evidence, a specific warning against using the evidence to bolster the complainant's credibility is not essential. A misdirection in leaving hearsay evidence as supporting evidence will not occasion a miscarriage of justice where the evidence was the least compelling of the supporting evidence and it is not reasonably possible the misdirection affected the verdict.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 2 later cases that cite this judgment.