Admissibility of evidence — threats to kill — breach of protection order — assault with intent to injure — previous conviction — abusive texts — Mahomed v R [2011] NZSC 52, [2011] 3 NZLR 145 — Evidence Act 2006, ss 40 & 43. The defendant was facing charges of threat to kill, breach of protection order and assault with intent to injure. The charges arose from an incident involving his partner. The Crown alleged that he had become upset when his partner had given medicine to their young son, had then threatened to kill her, grabbed her by the throat and shoved her to the ground. The Crown applied to admit as propensity evidence the defendant's previous conviction for behaving in a threatening manner. In that case he had sent his partner a series of abusive and threatening texts. The defendant opposed the application, arguing that the previous offending was too different to that alleged in the current case. The Court considered that the evidence suggested that the defendant had a tendency to impose his will over his partner when in conflict over the care of their son and to back this up by becoming angry and issuing threats. The evidence was sufficiently specific and linked to the allegations in the current case to qualify as propensity evidence, and would provide the jury with context to the relationship between the defendant and his partner. The Court ruled that the evidence be admitted. Judgment Date: 24 January 2019. * * * Note: names have been changed to comply with legal requirements. * * *