R v Keli LANE [No 4] [2010] NSWSC 1531

R v Keli LANE [No 4] [2010] NSWSC 1531

The hypothetical question sought to be asked of Mr Gillies concerning what he would have done if told of the accused's pregnancy is inadmissible because it is irrelevant; it is too far removed from the real issue and would not assist the jury.

Parties
Crown: Regina; Accused: Keli Lane
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 August 2010
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Procedural Ruling on Admissibility of Evidence
Outcome
Question disallowed; evidence ruled inadmissible
Legal Topics
Admissibility of Evidence, Hypothetical Questions to Witnesses, Relevance of Evidence
Criminal Law Evidence Law Admissibility of Evidence Hypothetical Questions to Witnesses Relevance of 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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Crown

Keli Lane

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Procedural Ruling on Admissibility of Evidence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a hypothetical question about the likely conduct of a witness if a material fact had been disclosed is admissible and relevant

Ratio Decidendi

The hypothetical question sought to be asked of Mr Gillies concerning what he would have done if told of the accused's pregnancy is inadmissible because it is irrelevant; it is too far removed from the real issue and would not assist the jury.

Court Disposition

Question disallowed; evidence ruled inadmissible

Orders

  • The Crown is not allowed to ask Mr Gillies the hypothetical question as to what he would have done if told of the pregnancy.