Commonwealth Numbered Regulations Commonwealth Numbered Regulations(1) The summary authority must assess the credibility of a witness by determining whether the testimony of the witness is:
(a) truthful; and
(b) reliable.
(2) In considering whether the testimony is truthful, the summary authority may have regard to whether the witness:
(a) has a motive for being untruthful; or
(b) demonstrates a lack of objectivity; or
(c) has made any complaint or report of the conduct which is the subject of a charge before the summary authority, and, if so, the interval between the conduct and the complaint or report; or
(d) has previously made an oral or written statement that is inconsistent with the testimony; or
(e) subject to rule 59 for the accused person -- has any previous convictions for dishonesty, perjury or making false representations; or
(f) is evasive, vague, equivocal or argumentative in answering questions.
(3) Subrule (2) does not limit the matters that the summary authority may take into account in considering whether the testimony is truthful.
(4) In considering whether the testimony is reliable, the summary authority may have regard to the following matters:
(a) the time that has elapsed since the subject of the testimony occurred;
(b) the ease or difficulty the witness has in recollection;
(c) whether the witness made a record in writing of relevant observations at a time when the observations were still fresh in the mind of the witness;
(d) any disability or impairment of the witness, temporary or not, that could affect observations made by the witness or the testimony of the witness;
(e) the quality of any observation made by reference to:
(i) the time available for the observation; and
(ii) the circumstances of the observation; and
(iii) the familiarity of the witness with the subject of the observation;
(f) the consistency of the testimony of the witness when considered as a whole, and also when compared with all other evidence in the case;
(g) if the witness gives secondary evidence -- the matters mentioned in paragraphs 56 (3) (b) to (e).
(5) Subrule (4) does not limit the matters that the summary authority may take into account in considering whether the testimony is reliable.
Examples -- truthful but not reliable
1 A mess is broken into at night. A person is seen running away carrying alcohol. The offender is unknown to the witness. The witness observes the offender in low light at a distance.
The witness is being truthful in stating that the offender is the accused before the summary authority, but the evidence would have very low reliability because of paragraph (4) (e). The evidence could still be considered in the case as a whole, for example in conjunction with evidence that upon a search of the accused person's accommodation alcohol matching the stolen items was discovered.
2 A witness may be truthful, but mistaken, because of a temporary impairment at the time of observation such as exhaustion or intoxication -- see paragraph (4) (d).