A victim impact statement created after trial that contains no prior inconsistent statements but merely expresses the complainant's own opinion about her cognitive abilities (here, a claim of 'extraordinary memory' due to autism spectrum disorder) does not constitute fresh evidence productive of a miscarriage of justice, particularly where the complainant's memory failures at trial related to peripheral matters rather than the details of the offending. The general consistency of preliminary complaint evidence with trial evidence is sufficient; minor inconsistencies in the manner of describing the same events do not constitute material errors of fact.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 2 later cases that cite this judgment.
2 of the 2 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.