Propensity evidence — relationship evidence — assault on child — previous violence in household. The defendant faced two charges of assault on a child. The complainant was the defendant's daughter, and the charges arose from two alleged incidents when the defendant and the complainant argued about doing the dishes. The defendant challenged the Crown's evidence relating to previous attacks by the defendant on her children, and frequent fights between the defendant and her partner. The defendant argued that this evidence was unfairly prejudicial, being too specific to qualify as general relationship evidence. The Court agreed with the Crown that the evidence qualified as relationship evidence. The evidence explained the dynamics of the household, including the defendant's relationship with her partner and her problems with alcohol. It would be artificial to present the evidence relating to the assaults without other evidence providing context. Also the evidence rebutted the defendant's assertion to police that she never hit her children. Appropriate directions from the Court could stop the jury from treating the evidence as propensity evidence. The Crown was to prepare a draft jury direction for the defendant to consider. The Court found that the challenged evidence was admissible. Judgment Date: 25 June 2018. * * * Note: names have been changed to comply with legal requirements. * * *