A trial judge who repeats the standard direction that the jury must decide on the evidence and not speculate about absent evidence, in the context of summarising defence counsel's argument about the prosecution's failure to investigate, does not thereby undermine the defence case or trigger an obligation to give a 'full Jones v Dunkel direction'; indeed, giving such a direction in a criminal trial where no identified witness was expected to be called would be contrary to authority.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 4 later cases that cite this judgment.