Where agreed facts or cross-examination elicit out-of-court statements by a complainant that amount to hearsay evidence of an implied admission by the accused, the trial judge must direct the jury that such statements are not evidence of the truth of their contents, even if no objection or request for direction is made by counsel. The failure to give such a direction, particularly where a direction is given in respect of complaint evidence but not in respect of other hearsay, may constitute a miscarriage of justice. Under s 34M of the Evidence Act 1929 (SA), only genuine complaints are capable of use as evidence of consistency of conduct; other disclosures should be distinguished.
The full text is available to signed-in members.