Evidence that is relevant only to show a disposition or propensity cannot be admitted as 'context evidence' to circumvent the significant probative value test under s 31A of the Evidence Act 1906 (WA). Evidence of a general sexual interest, without evidence of a disposition to act upon it or strikingly specific features common to the offences, will not meet the significant probative value requirement. Where an accused suffers memory loss that impairs the ability to marshal a defence, this must be linked to the forensic disadvantage component of a Longman direction; directing the jury that memory loss is irrelevant while giving a standard Longman direction will occasion a miscarriage of justice.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 2 later cases that cite this judgment.