On appeal, the admissibility of tendency evidence should be assessed at the time the trial judge ruled, allowing for any clarification of issues in dispute before the evidence was adduced, but not retrospectively by reference to material available on appeal. A 16-year gap between prior offending and charged offences does not preclude tendency evidence having significant probative value where the gap is explained by incarceration. The fact that a non-parole period extends beyond an offender's statistical life expectancy is not, of itself, indicative of manifest excess; age cannot be given determinative weight in fixing a non-parole period.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 16 later cases that cite this judgment.
8 of the 16 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.