Explain the Court of Appeals' holding that propensity to be untruthful can be demonstrated, if the D pleaded not guilty to the earlier offence but was convicted following a trial at which his account was disbelieved under Hanson [2005].

Sure. The Court of Appeals in Hanson held that propensity to be untruthful can be demonstrated, if the D pleaded not guilty to the earlier offence but was convicted following a trial at which his account was disbelieved. The Court found that the D's plea of not guilty to the earlier offence was evidence of his consciousness of guilt, and that his conviction following a trial at which his account was disbelieved was evidence that he was not a credible witness. The Court also found that the D's propensity to be untruthful was relevant to the issue of whether he was telling the truth on the occasion in question. The Court's decision in Hanson has been criticized by some commentators, who argue that it is too broad and could lead to the admission of irrelevant and prejudicial evidence. However, the decision remains good law and is likely to be followed by other courts. Here are some additional details on the Court's reasoning in Hanson: The Court found that the D's plea of not guilty to the earlier offence was evidence of his consciousness of guilt. The Court reasoned that a person who is innocent would not plead not guilty, but would instead testify in their own defense. The Court found that the D's conviction following a trial at which his account was disbelieved was evidence that he was not a credible witness. The Court reasoned that a jury had found that the D was not telling the truth on the occasion in question, and that this was relevant to the issue of whether he was telling the truth on the occasion in question. The Court found that the D's propensity to be untruthful was relevant to the issue of whether he was telling the truth on the occasion in question. The Court reasoned that a person who has a propensity to be untruthful is more likely to lie on a particular occasion than a person who does not have a propensity to be untruthful. It is important to note that the Court's decision in Hanson is not a blanket rule that allows the admission of all evidence of a witness's propensity to be untruthful. The Court still requires that the evidence be relevant and reliable. However, the Court's decision in Hanson does make it easier for prosecutors to introduce evidence of a witness's propensity to be untruthful.