R v Bruce GOSEN [2011] NSWDC 260

R v Bruce GOSEN [2011] NSWDC 260

Exhibit VDM was admitted because its probative value was high: it could support an attack on the accused's credibility as a possible lie and was inconsistent with his account that his travel was arranged by others. The risk of unfair prejudice did not outweigh that probative value, given that the jury would receive directions about alleged lies and a warning under s 165 concerning the document's reliability.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
28 December 2011
Procedural Posture
Criminal Prosecution for Importing Cocaine Into Australia / Ruling on Admissibility of Exhibit VDM During Jury Trial
Outcome
Evidence admitted.
Legal Topics
['admissibility of Evidence' 'probative Value and Unfair Prejudice' 'evidence of Alleged Lie by Accused' 'reliability Warning']
['criminal Law' 'evidence'] ['admissibility of Evidence' 'probative Value and Unfair Prejudice' 'evidence of Alleged Lie by Accused' 'reliability Warning']

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 Prosecution for Importing Cocaine Into Australia / Ruling on Admissibility of Exhibit VDM During Jury Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether Exhibit VDM, a printout or screen shot from a Vancouver travel agent's records showing travel paid by a credit card in the accused's name, should be excluded under s 137 of the Evidence Act 1995." "Whether the document's probative value was outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice to the accused." 'Whether concerns about internal inconsistencies and reliability in the document should prevent admission or be dealt with by jury argument and a warning.']

Ratio Decidendi

Exhibit VDM was admitted because its probative value was high: it could support an attack on the accused's credibility as a possible lie and was inconsistent with his account that his travel was arranged by others. The risk of unfair prejudice did not outweigh that probative value, given that the jury would receive directions about alleged lies and a warning under s 165 concerning the document's reliability.

Court Disposition

Evidence admitted.

Orders

  • ['Exhibit VDM admitted into evidence.']