Section 34CB of the Evidence Act 1929 (SA) does not require a judge in a trial without a jury to give a significant forensic disadvantage warning, but the judge must still take forensic disadvantage into account when considering whether the charge has been proved beyond reasonable doubt. Where the forensic question is whether a complainant's account is fabricated (rather than honest but unreliable due to intoxication or impaired memory), the trial judge is not required to undertake separate assessments of honesty and reliability; acceptance of the evidence beyond reasonable doubt necessarily entails acceptance of both.
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.