Introduction

Criminal trials in which the jury hears no expert testimony, propensity evidence or evidence of a prior consistent statement are the exception rather than the norm, for all of these types of evidence are potentially admissible under the Evidence Act 2006 (the Act); indeed, such are criminal law staples.   

The purpose of this paper is twofold: first, to update practitioners in relation to how our highest courts are dealing with these types of evidence; and second, to explain what such treatment implies for those prosecuting or defending criminal trials.