s. 61 (a) the judge must not warn, or suggest in any way to, the jury that the law regards complainants in sexual cases as an unreliable class of witness; and (b) if evidence is given or a question is asked of S. 61(1)(b) amended by a witness or a statement is made in the No. 81/1997 course of an address on evidence which s. 6(1), substituted by tends to suggest that there was delay in No. 76/2006 making a complaint about the alleged s. 3(1). offence by the person against whom the offence is alleged to have been committed, the judge— (i) must inform the jury that there may be good reasons why a victim of a sexual assault may delay or hesitate in complaining about it; and (ii) must not warn, or suggest in any way to, the jury that the credibility of the complainant is affected by the delay unless, on the application of the accused, the judge is satisfied that there is sufficient evidence tending to suggest that the credibility of the complainant is so affected to justify the giving of such a warning; and (iii) must not warn, or suggest in any way to, the jury that it would be dangerous or unsafe to find the accused guilty because of the delay. S. 61(1A) (1A) If the judge, on the application of the accused in a inserted by proceeding to which subsection (1) applies, is No. 76/2006 satisfied that the accused has suffered a significant s. 3(2). forensic disadvantage because of the consequences of the delay in making a complaint about the alleged offence by the person against whom the offence is alleged to have been committed, the judge must, in any terms that the
(a) the judge must not warn, or suggest in any way to, the jury that the law regards complainants in sexual cases as an unreliable class of witness; and S. 61(1)(b) amended by No. 81/1997 s. 6(1), substituted by No. 76/2006 s. 3(1). (b) if evidence is given or a question is asked of a witness or a statement is made in the course of an address on evidence which tends to suggest that there was delay in making a complaint about the alleged offence by the person against whom the offence is alleged to have been committed, the judge— (i) must inform the jury that there may be good reasons why a victim of a sexual assault may delay or hesitate in complaining about it; and (ii) must not warn, or suggest in any way to, the jury that the credibility of the complainant is affected by the delay unless, on the application of the accused, the judge is satisfied that there is sufficient evidence tending to suggest that the credibility of the complainant is so affected to justify the giving of such a warning; and s. 61 (iii) must not warn, or suggest in any way to, the jury that it would be dangerous or unsafe to find the accused guilty because of the delay. S. 61(1A) inserted by No. 76/2006 s. 3(2). (1A) If the judge, on the application of the accused in a proceeding to which subsection (1) applies, is satisfied that the accused has suffered a significant forensic disadvantage because of the consequences of the delay in making a complaint about the alleged offence by the person against whom the offence is alleged to have been committed, the judge must, in any terms that the
58-6231a241.docx