Expert evidence of a complainant's blood alcohol concentration is not required in sexual assault trials where the Crown relies on intoxication evidence; lay observations and CCTV footage are sufficient for the tribunal of fact. A Crown prosecutor may open on alternate bases (including substantial intoxication negating consent) and narrow the case for closing without this constituting a departure from the Crown case. A bare 'cheat fail' entry on an academic transcript, without further particularity as to the underlying conduct, is insufficient to meet the s 103(1) Evidence Act threshold for cross-examination as to credibility.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 10 later cases that cite this judgment.
7 of the 10 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.