The distinction between 'fresh evidence' (not available with reasonable diligence at trial — requires only a significant possibility of different verdict) and 'new evidence' (could have been called at trial — requires the appellate court to be persuaded of innocence or reasonable doubt) was applied. Evidence of prior sexual allegations by a complainant does not establish a propensity for false complaints absent evidence that the prior allegations were in fact false. A trial judge's decision to allow the prosecution to reopen its case to recall witnesses on matters raised for the first time in the accused's evidence-in-chief, rather than giving a [name withheld] v [name withheld] direction, was upheld as the most sensible and just course.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 3 later cases that cite this judgment.