R v Edwards [2019] NSWSC 1819

R v Edwards [2019] NSWSC 1819

Assuming there had been an impropriety in obtaining the evidence, the evidence should nevertheless be admitted under s 138 because it had significant probative value in the Crown's circumstantial case, the murder charge was of grave seriousness, the asserted impropriety was of relatively low gravity, the accused attended voluntarily with his son to provide further information, and any impropriety was not deliberate but at most reckless.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
29 October 2019
Procedural Posture
Criminal Trial on Charge of Murder / Voir Dire/admissibility Ruling on Accused's Objection to Evidence of Conversation With Police
Outcome
Evidence admitted
Legal Topics
["admissibility of Accused's Conversation With Police" 'police Caution' 'protected Suspect Under Lepra' 'exclusion of Improperly Obtained Evidence' 'murder Trial']
['criminal Law' 'evidence' 'criminal Procedure'] ["admissibility of Accused's Conversation With Police" 'police Caution' 'protected Suspect Under Lepra' 'exclusion of Improperly Obtained Evidence' 'murder Trial']

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 on Charge of Murder / Voir Dire/admissibility Ruling on Accused's Objection to Evidence of Conversation With Police

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the accused became a protected suspect under s 110 of the Law Enforcement (Powers and Responsibilities) Act 2002 (NSW) during the 2 April 2015 conversation with police' 'Whether any failure to comply with s 122 of the Law Enforcement (Powers and Responsibilities) Act 2002 (NSW) meant the evidence was improperly obtained and liable to exclusion under s 138 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW)' 'Whether the discretion under s 138 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) should be exercised to admit the evidence']

Ratio Decidendi

Assuming there had been an impropriety in obtaining the evidence, the evidence should nevertheless be admitted under s 138 because it had significant probative value in the Crown's circumstantial case, the murder charge was of grave seriousness, the asserted impropriety was of relatively low gravity, the accused attended voluntarily with his son to provide further information, and any impropriety was not deliberate but at most reckless.

Court Disposition

Evidence admitted

Orders

  • ['The evidence of the conversation between the accused and his son and Detective King of 2 April 2015, insofar as it is relied upon by the Crown, is admissible.']