R v Beattie (No 3) [2015] NSWSC 396

R v Beattie (No 3) [2015] NSWSC 396

Clip 1 had quite high probative value in showing how the accused moved away from and back to the table, and the danger of unfair prejudice was remote, so s 137 was not engaged. Clip 2 showed the accused engaged in pushing and shoving and, because it could deflect the jury from focusing on his state of mind at about 3 AM and could be replayed in the jury room, its probative value was outweighed by a real danger of unfair prejudice, requiring exclusion under s 137.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
10 March 2015
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Procedural Ruling on Objection to CCTV Evidence Under S 137 Evidence Act 1995 (nsw)
Outcome
Clip 1 will be admitted into evidence, but clip 2 will be excluded from evidence.
Legal Topics
['admissibility of CCTV Footage' 'probative Value' 'unfair Prejudice' 'evidence Act 1995 (nsw), S 137']
['criminal Law' 'evidence'] ['admissibility of CCTV Footage' 'probative Value' 'unfair Prejudice' 'evidence Act 1995 (nsw), S 137']

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 / Procedural Ruling on Objection to CCTV Evidence Under S 137 Evidence Act 1995 (nsw)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether clip 1 of the CCTV footage should be excluded under s 137 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) because its probative value is outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice.' 'Whether clip 2 of the CCTV footage should be excluded under s 137 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) because its probative value is outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice.']

Ratio Decidendi

Clip 1 had quite high probative value in showing how the accused moved away from and back to the table, and the danger of unfair prejudice was remote, so s 137 was not engaged. Clip 2 showed the accused engaged in pushing and shoving and, because it could deflect the jury from focusing on his state of mind at about 3 AM and could be replayed in the jury room, its probative value was outweighed by a real danger of unfair prejudice, requiring exclusion under s 137.

Court Disposition

Clip 1 will be admitted into evidence, but clip 2 will be excluded from evidence.

Orders

  • ['Clip 1 will be admitted into evidence.' 'Clip 2 will be excluded from evidence.']