R v Jones & Ors (No8) [2007] NSWSC 1159

R v Jones & Ors (No8) [2007] NSWSC 1159

There was insufficient evidence to conclude, on the balance of probabilities, that a joint criminal enterprise existed at the time the phone calls were made; thus, the prerequisites for admissibility under s 87(1)(c) were not met, and the objection to admissibility was upheld.

Parties
Crown: Regina; Accused: Adam Jones; Accused: Samuel Jones; Accused: Elizabeth Jean Jones; Accused: Lydia Jones; Accused: Adam Samuel Jones
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
08 June 2007
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Interlocutory (objection to Admissibility of Evidence)
Outcome
Objection upheld
Legal Topics
Admissibility of Evidence, Joint Criminal Enterprise, Admissions by Co Conspirator
Criminal Law Evidence Admissibility of Evidence Joint Criminal Enterprise Admissions by Co Conspirator

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 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Crown

Adam Jones

Accused

Samuel Jones

Accused

Elizabeth Jean Jones

Accused

Lydia Jones

Accused

Adam Samuel Jones

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Interlocutory (objection to Admissibility of Evidence)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether intercepted telephone calls by co-accused are admissible against the accused under s 87(1)(c) Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) as representations made in furtherance of a common purpose

Ratio Decidendi

There was insufficient evidence to conclude, on the balance of probabilities, that a joint criminal enterprise existed at the time the phone calls were made; thus, the prerequisites for admissibility under s 87(1)(c) were not met, and the objection to admissibility was upheld.

Court Disposition

Objection upheld

Orders

  • Objection to admissibility of two intercepted telephone calls is upheld; evidence not admitted.