R v Da Silva [2016] NSWSC 763

R v Da Silva [2016] NSWSC 763

The adjournment was refused because a seven sitting day delay after the close of the Crown case was unacceptable and not in the interests of justice; the accused bore no onus to prove that other men existed or to rebut the Crown case; proper directions could prevent adverse jury reasoning from any failure to call evidence; and there was no evidentiary basis suggesting that a further computer examination would likely produce material helpful to the accused, making the proposed course speculative.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 May 2016
Procedural Posture
Criminal Trial / Mid Trial Application for Adjournment After Close of the Crown Case
Outcome
Application for adjournment refused
Legal Topics
['adjournment Application' 'computer Records' 'expert Evidence' 'jury Directions' 'onus of Proof']
['criminal Law' 'criminal Procedure'] ['adjournment Application' 'computer Records' 'expert Evidence' 'jury Directions' 'onus of Proof']

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 Trial / Mid Trial Application for Adjournment After Close of the Crown Case

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the accused should be granted an adjournment until 2 June 2016 to allow a computer expert to exhaustively analyse the deceased's computer records." "Whether the non-exhaustive police examination of the deceased's computer created a need for an adjournment mid-trial." 'Whether the accused would suffer forensic prejudice or adverse jury inference if he did not conduct a further examination of the computer records.']

Ratio Decidendi

The adjournment was refused because a seven sitting day delay after the close of the Crown case was unacceptable and not in the interests of justice; the accused bore no onus to prove that other men existed or to rebut the Crown case; proper directions could prevent adverse jury reasoning from any failure to call evidence; and there was no evidentiary basis suggesting that a further computer examination would likely produce material helpful to the accused, making the proposed course speculative.

Court Disposition

Application for adjournment refused

Orders

  • ["Mr Da Silva's further application for an adjournment is refused."]