A trial judge's volunteered comments in a summing up about the general characteristics of children's evidence, personal observations about cross-examination, and arguments not advanced by the Crown may cumulatively give rise to a miscarriage of justice even where no individual comment is impermissible in isolation. The principles in McKell v The Queen confine the scope of permissible comment more tightly than the pre-McKell authorities. The absence of objection by experienced defence counsel at trial does not preclude a grant of leave under Rule 4 where the extent of the commentary and the real risk of prejudice warrant it.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 2 later cases that cite this judgment.
1 of the 2 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.