Context evidence of prior violence admitted for the limited purpose of explaining a complainant's state of mind must be handled with considerable care in cross-examination and closing address to avoid inviting impermissible tendency reasoning. A Crown Prosecutor's cumulative use of intemperate language, injection of personal opinion, factual inaccuracies, and improper reliance on post-offence conduct can together constitute a miscarriage of justice even where no individual error would suffice. Rule 4 of the Criminal Appeal Rules does not apply to prosecutorial conduct in cross-examination and closing address, and failure to object at trial does not preclude a finding of unfairness in the unusual atmosphere of a particular trial.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 8 later cases that cite this judgment.
4 of the 8 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.