ABSTRACT
In other words, the prosecution’s case should consist of evidence about the offence that the defendant has been charged with, rather than evidence of other misconduct by the defendant. A contemporary rationale for excluding such evidence was given by Kirby J in BRS v R:
The exclusion of such evidence, even though relevant, may therefore be seen as a consequence of the high degree of specificity of our criminal procedure. This is itself the product of the endeavour of the courts to avoid the risk of unfairness to an accused person. Such unfairness could arise quite readily if evidence of other conduct, criminal or simply discreditable, were admitted which tended to label the accused with a ‘bad character’ from which a jury might reason to a conviction of guilt of the charges under consideration.2
