In child sexual assault trials where the evidence of multiple complainants is already cross-admissible as tendency evidence, the forensic disadvantage of raising good character in the particular respect of absence of prior sexual offending is slight, because the jury is already being directed to consider each complainant's evidence when assessing the other. Where the Crown cannot rebut such character evidence, the failure to raise it may constitute a miscarriage of justice even where the decision was a deliberate forensic choice by counsel. Defence counsel in such cases should carefully consider raising divisible character regarding absence of prior sexual offending, particularly where the accused is of middle age with no prior allegations.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 1 later case that cites this judgment.
1 of the 1 citing case carries a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.