Propensity evidence — threatening to kill — evidence of previous conviction — Campbell-Joyce v R [2016] NZCA 192 — Mahomed v R [2011] NZSC 52, [2011] 3 NZLR 145 — R v Hanson [2005] 1 WLR 3169 — Evidence Act 2006, ss 40 & 43. The defendant faced a charge of threatening to kill. The complainant was the defendant's ex-partner, and at the relevant time they were in Family Court proceedings relating to the care of their children. One day the defendant went to the complainant's house, yelled abuse and demanded to see the children. He then left, pointing at the complainant and making a slicing motion across his throat as he did so. The Crown sought to introduce as propensity evidence the defendant's previous conviction for threatening to cause grievous bodily harm to the complainant. Shortly before the incident giving rise to the current charge, he had sent her several abusive and threatening text messages, ultimately leading to the conviction. The Crown argued that this previous incident showed the defendant's tendency to behave in a threatening and aggressive manner towards the complainant, especially in the context of the custody dispute. The defendant argued that the evidence was not relevant to the current charge, that a single incident doesn't demonstrate propensity, and that the evidence would be unfairly prejudicial. The Court pointed out that case law has in fact established that a single incident can demonstrate propensity. The text messages and the alleged offending were closely connected in time, the incidents were similar in that they both involved hostile and aggressive behaviour by the defendant towards the complainant, and the trial judge would easily be able to minimise any risk of unfair prejudice to the defendant. The Court allowed the previous conviction to be led as propensity evidence. Judgment Date: 25 May 2018. * * * Note: names have been changed to comply with legal requirements. * * *