In joint trials involving sexual offences against multiple complainants, the trial judge must give directions on the use that can or cannot be made of one complainant's evidence in the case involving the other complainant, including a warning against propensity reasoning in respect of charged acts. A direction against propensity reasoning limited to uncharged acts is insufficient where the evidence of charged acts against one complainant is cross-admissible in the case of the other. There is no room for a neutral or silent position on this issue.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 1 later case that cites this judgment.