Application to amend charge list — propensity evidence — Crimes Act 1961, ss 72, 131B, 209(b) — Evidence Act 2006, s 43 — Criminal Procedure Act 2011, s 78 (4)(a)(i). The defendant faced charges arising from an incident where he approached a school girl in the street and spoke to her, later sending her a series of texts. The Crown alleged that the defendant was trying to persuade the girl to get into his vehicle, and to groom her sexually; the defendant maintained that he had an innocent reason for his actions. The Crown sought separation of charges, so there would be a charge relating to his initial approach of the girl and another relating to the texts he sent later. The Court agreed to separate the charges, reasoning that to do so was in the interests of justice, accurately reflected the different conduct alleged by the Crown, and would not be prejudicial to the defence. The next issue was whether to admit propensity evidence, related to a separate incident where a man had approached and spoke to a different girl as she was on her way to school. The man involved this incident was driving the same vehicle as the defendant drove during the incident giving rise to the charges. The Court found that the circumstantial evidence pointed to the defendant as being the man involved in this second incident. The Court then found that given the similarity of the two incidents and the unusualness of the relevant acts and circumstances, the defendant's actions in relation to the first school girl provided highly probative evidence that he was the man involved in the second incident. The risk of unfair prejudice to the defendant was mitigated by the fact that the trial was to be judge-alone. The Court allowed the evidence to be admitted as propensity evidence. Judgment Date: 27 August 2018.