Post-offence conduct involving an offer of a substantial inducement to a complainant to withdraw allegations is capable of being viewed by a jury as evidence of incriminating conduct referable to all charged offences, even where the charges involve discrete occasions and different defences. The difficulty in attributing the implied admission to any particular charge does not render the evidence inadmissible. The question whether House v The King principles or independent appellate judgment governs interlocutory appeals from s 20(1)(b) JDA determinations remains open.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 2 later cases that cite this judgment.