Where all evidence in a multi-count child pornography prosecution is cross-admissible, a trial judge is not required to give separate reasons for each count and may properly consider all counts compendiously. An infelicity of expression referring to propensity reasoning does not constitute error where the trial judge's reasons as a whole demonstrate that verdicts were reached through improbability reasoning. The term 'subsequent offence' in s 63A of the Criminal Law Consolidation Act 1935 (SA) means an offence committed after conviction for an earlier offence, not merely an offence committed after the commission of an earlier offence.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 4 later cases that cite this judgment.
3 of the 4 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.