R v Qaumi and Ors (No 6) [2016] NSWSC 1600

R v Qaumi and Ors (No 6) [2016] NSWSC 1600

Although the evidence that Farhad Qaumi boasted about involvement in three earlier killings was relevant to explaining fear and obedience within Blacktown BFL, its probative value was reduced by the substantial other evidence of threats, assaults and intimidation. The danger that the jury would speculate about whether he committed the earlier killings, misuse the evidence, or be influenced despite directions outweighed that probative value under s 137, and the prejudice could not be cured by direction.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 February 2016
Procedural Posture
Criminal Prosecution / Pre Trial Procedural Ruling on Admissibility of Evidence
Outcome
The evidence is inadmissible.
Legal Topics
['admissibility of Evidence' 'probative Value' 'unfair Prejudice' 'evidence of Threats and Intimidation' 'tendency Evidence']
['criminal Law' 'evidence'] ['admissibility of Evidence' 'probative Value' 'unfair Prejudice' 'evidence of Threats and Intimidation' 'tendency Evidence']

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 / Pre Trial Procedural Ruling on Admissibility of Evidence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether evidence that Farhad Qaumi boasted of involvement in three earlier killings was admissible to explain why informant witnesses obeyed orders through fear and intimidation.' 'Whether the probative value of that evidence was outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice under s 137 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW).' 'Whether any unfair prejudice from the evidence could be cured by judicial direction.']

Ratio Decidendi

Although the evidence that Farhad Qaumi boasted about involvement in three earlier killings was relevant to explaining fear and obedience within Blacktown BFL, its probative value was reduced by the substantial other evidence of threats, assaults and intimidation. The danger that the jury would speculate about whether he committed the earlier killings, misuse the evidence, or be influenced despite directions outweighed that probative value under s 137, and the prejudice could not be cured by direction.

Court Disposition

The evidence is inadmissible.

Orders

  • ['Subject to the stated provisos, the evidence that Farhad Qaumi boasted of involvement in three earlier killings is not admissible.' "If the Court's understanding of the admissible evidence of other acts of violence and intimidation is incorrect in a significant way, the Crown may re-ventilate admissibility." "The...