A statement in a pretext call that is capable of being regarded as a statement against interest is admissible even where alternative innocent inferences are available; the availability of competing inferences does not render evidence intractably neutral. Where the prosecution relies on a statement against interest rather than a confession, there is no requirement for the jury to be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the words constitute an admission, nor is a Burns-type direction mandatory.
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.