T Gartelmann, “Tendency, coincidence and joint trials”, paper presented to the 2018 Public Defenders Conference, 17 March 2018, Sydney. Acknowledgment to Carly Berrigan for assistance in preparation of the paper.

Tendency evidence and coincidence evidence are among the more complicated and controversial areas of evidence law in criminal cases.

This article should be read in light of the High Court decision in The Queen v Bauer [2018] HCA 40, particularly at [47]–[60], [67]–[69], [86]. Suggested directions in single complainant sexual offences cases where evidence of uncharged acts is admitted as tendency evidence are set out in the judgment at [86]. Readers should refer to commentary and directions in the section of the Criminal Trial Courts Bench Book titled “Tendency, coincidence and background evidence” at [4-200]ff.