The existence of a conflict of evidence does not make prosecution evidence or submissions about that evidence misleading. A trial counsel's forensic decision not to cross-examine a witness on a point, where cross-examination would likely elicit a damaging response, is an objectively well-founded exercise of forensic judgment that does not give rise to a miscarriage of justice. The 'one transaction rule' is no more than a rule of thumb; the real question is whether the total sentence properly reflects the overall criminality.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 5 later cases that cite this judgment.
2 of the 5 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.