R v Rogerson; R v McNamara (No 52) [2016] NSWSC 628

R v Rogerson; R v McNamara (No 52) [2016] NSWSC 628

The probative value of Butler's evidence is outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice to Rogerson, primarily because the focus would shift to collateral issues regarding inconsistencies in Butler's statements, which could mislead the jury and amount to unfair prejudice under s. 137 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW). Accordingly, the evidence is excluded.

Parties
Crown: Regina; Accused: Roger Caleb Rogerson; Accused: Glen Patrick McNamara
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
16 May 2016
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Ruling on Admissibility of Evidence (crown Case in Reply)
Outcome
Application to admit Butler's evidence in Crown reply refused; evidence excluded.
Legal Topics
Admissibility of Evidence, Crown Case in Reply, Unfair Prejudice, S 137 Evidence Act 1995 (nsw)
Criminal Law Evidence Admissibility of Evidence Crown Case in Reply Unfair Prejudice S 137 Evidence Act 1995 (nsw)

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 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Crown

Roger Caleb Rogerson

Accused

Glen Patrick McNamara

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Ruling on Admissibility of Evidence (crown Case in Reply)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the evidence of Tony Butler should be admitted in the Crown case in reply
  2. 2 Whether the evidence is relevant
  3. 3 Whether the evidence ought be excluded under s 137 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) due to unfair prejudice

Ratio Decidendi

The probative value of Butler's evidence is outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice to Rogerson, primarily because the focus would shift to collateral issues regarding inconsistencies in Butler's statements, which could mislead the jury and amount to unfair prejudice under s. 137 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW). Accordingly, the evidence is excluded.

Court Disposition

Application to admit Butler's evidence in Crown reply refused; evidence excluded.

Orders

  • Crown not permitted to call Butler in reply; Butler's evidence excluded under s. 137 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW).
  • Evidence of 1999 charges against Butler also excluded.