R v Tully (No 1)

In the case of R v Tully (No 1), the accused, Tully, was facing charges that involved multiple complainants. The Crown sought to adduce evidence of eight separate incidents that occurred over a period of several years, all involving different complainants. The primary legal issue before the court was whether the probative value of this tendency evidence outweighed the risk of prejudice to the accused. Specifically, the court needed to determine if the possibility of concoction affected the evidence's probative value, considering there was no demonstrated motive for the accused to concoct these incidents. Furthermore, the court had to assess whether the potential for a jury to be misled by the sheer number of incidents, combined with the accused's limited ability to respond to these uncharged acts due to a lack of specificity, rendered the prejudice to the accused too great.

The court found that while there was a risk of prejudice due to the number of incidents and the lack of specificity, the probative value of the evidence was significant in establishing a pattern of behaviour. The absence of a motive for concoction, along with the distinctive nature of the acts, supported the admissibility of the evidence. The court concluded that the probative value of the tendency evidence was not substantially diminished by the potential for prejudice. Therefore, the Crown's application to adduce the evidence was allowed in part, permitting the introduction of some, but not all, of the incidents to the jury.