A Liberato direction given in respect of one accused's sworn evidence need not be separately repeated when the trial judge subsequently directs the jury on an out-of-court statement by a co-accused, provided the directions read as a whole adequately convey that each piece of evidence must be separately weighed and that rejection of one does not automatically lead to guilt. A trial judge's identification of competing inferences from evidence (such as a car leaving the scene at speed) does not constitute impermissible creation of a competing hypothesis where those possibilities were already raised in the defence case. [name withheld]'s dissent raises the question whether, where the prosecution has disavowed a flight argument, the trial judge is obliged to give a protective direction against consciousness of guilt reasoning rather than merely refraining from raising it.
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.