Where co-accused are tried jointly and the Crown cross-examines one accused on matters adverse to the other without putting those propositions to the other accused, and the Crown's closing address and the trial judge's summing up repeat those matters without qualification, a miscarriage of justice may be established even where no application for further directions was made at trial. The Crown Prosecutor is entitled to use strong language in closing (describing evidence as 'ludicrous' or 'defying belief') and to invite jurors to consider their own experience of memory, provided this does not cross into personal opinion, ridicule of the accused, or appeal to individual idiosyncratic experiences.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 6 later cases that cite this judgment.
2 of the 6 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.