When assessing the admissibility and use of post-offence conduct evidence, the specific fact sought to be proved by that evidence must first be identified; the significance and weight of the evidence will vary according to the relationship of the post-offence conduct to that specific fact. Where both parties have litigated on the basis that the accused did not kill the deceased and no hypothesis consistent with manslaughter has been raised, an appellant cannot complain that post-offence conduct evidence was equivocal as to intention. Post-offence conduct that is disproportionate to the level of culpability involved in a killing in self-defence or under provocation is capable of supporting an inference of consciousness of guilt of murder.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 10 later cases that cite this judgment.
6 of the 10 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.