R v WE (No.14) [2020] NSWSC 315

R v WE (No.14) [2020] NSWSC 315

The footage had low probative value, and that probative value was substantially outweighed by the danger that admitting and playing the material, which would take approximately 30 hours or six days of court time, could cause an undue waste of time. The evidence was therefore excluded under section 135(c) of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW).

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 March 2020
Procedural Posture
Criminal Evidence Ruling / During the Accused's Evidence in Chief Before the Jury
Outcome
Evidence excluded
Legal Topics
['accused Charged With Doing Acts in Preparation for a Terrorist Act or Acts' 'self Represented Accused' 'tender of Documentary and Video Material From Electronic Devices Seized by Police' 'probative Value' 'undue Waste of Time' 'exclusion of Evidence Under Section 135(c) of the Evidence Act 1995 (nsw)']
['criminal Law' 'evidence'] ['accused Charged With Doing Acts in Preparation for a Terrorist Act or Acts' 'self Represented Accused' 'tender of Documentary and Video Material From Electronic Devices Seized by Police' 'probative Value' 'undue Waste of Time' 'exclusion of Evidence Under Section 135(c) of the Evidence Act 1995 (nsw)']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Criminal Evidence Ruling / During the Accused's Evidence in Chief Before the Jury

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether video footage described as "The Life of Muhammad" should be admitted into evidence.' 'Whether the probative value of the footage was substantially outweighed by the danger that admitting it might cause or result in undue waste of time.']

Ratio Decidendi

The footage had low probative value, and that probative value was substantially outweighed by the danger that admitting and playing the material, which would take approximately 30 hours or six days of court time, could cause an undue waste of time. The evidence was therefore excluded under section 135(c) of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW).

Court Disposition

Evidence excluded

Orders

  • ['The evidence will not be admitted.']