The Court of Criminal Appeal held that a s 165(1)(d) Evidence Act unreliability warning should not have been given in respect of a witness whose evidence was exculpatory of the accused, because the exculpatory nature of the evidence constituted 'good reasons' under s 165(3) not to give the direction. The error was material because the witness (the applicant's brother) was an important witness whose evidence, if accepted, would have significantly supported acquittal, and the trial judge's warning used strong cautionary language that could realistically have affected the jury's reasoning to a verdict of guilty. The conviction was set aside and a retrial ordered; Ground 2 concerning consciousness of guilt directions for alleged lies was left unresolved for determination at the retrial.
The full text is available to signed-in members.