In child sexual offence cases, evidence of a third party's criminal history for sexual offending against children may be relevant and admissible where it provides an alternative explanation for the complainant's knowledge of sexual matters, even where the complainant denies any wrongdoing by the third party. A trial judge must not assess the relevance of such evidence on the premise that the complainant's denials are correct, as the very purpose of the evidence is to rebut those denials.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 1 later case that cites this judgment.
1 of the 1 citing case carries a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.