Washer v The State of Western Australia

Evidence – Admissibility - Relevance - Appellant convicted of conspiracy to possess a prohibited drug with intent to sell or supply it to another - Appellant had been previously acquitted of a conspiracy covering different times, parties and object, to possess a prohibited drug with intent to sell or supply it to another - Trial judge admitted evidence tending to show the appellant was a drug dealer (the "drug dealing evidence") - The drug dealing evidence had been adduced in the earlier trial in which the appellant was acquitted - Trial judge directed the jury not to use the drug dealing evidence to infer that a person who dealt in drugs on one occasion was more likely to do so subsequently - Whether the drug dealing evidence was relevant to the offence of which the appellant was convicted - Whether evidence that the appellant had been acquitted of the previous charge was relevant and admissible.

Words and phrases – "the full effect of an acquittal", "the full benefit of an acquittal".