R v Gordon (No 2) [2016] NSWSC 291

R v Gordon (No 2) [2016] NSWSC 291

The challenged stanza was inadmissible because the statement that the rock was most likely used on a minimum of three applications to bludgeon the deceased's head was not substantially based on Leading Senior Constable Griffith's specialised knowledge, but was a conclusion of primary fact for the jury to determine from the evidence as a whole.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
01 March 2016
Procedural Posture
Criminal Proceeding / Evidentiary Ruling on Admissibility of Expert Evidence
Outcome
The concluding portion of paragraph 33 at page 13 of Leading Senior Constable Griffith's statement of 21 February 2014 was ruled inadmissible.
Legal Topics
['admissibility of Expert Evidence' 'specialised Knowledge' 'jury Fact Finding']
['criminal Law' 'evidence'] ['admissibility of Expert Evidence' 'specialised Knowledge' 'jury Fact Finding']

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 Proceeding / Evidentiary Ruling on Admissibility of Expert Evidence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the concluding portion of paragraph 33 at page 13 of Leading Senior Constable Griffith's statement of 21 February 2014 was admissible as expert evidence." "Whether the statement that the rock was most likely used on a minimum of three applications to bludgeon the deceased's head was substantially based on the expert's specialised knowledge or was a conclusion of primary fact for the jury."]

Ratio Decidendi

The challenged stanza was inadmissible because the statement that the rock was most likely used on a minimum of three applications to bludgeon the deceased's head was not substantially based on Leading Senior Constable Griffith's specialised knowledge, but was a conclusion of primary fact for the jury to determine from the evidence as a whole.

Court Disposition

The concluding portion of paragraph 33 at page 13 of Leading Senior Constable Griffith's statement of 21 February 2014 was ruled inadmissible.

Orders

  • ['I reject the stanza commencing "The three large blood stains" and concluding "Daniel Cotter".' 'Leave is given to the Crown Prosecutor to re-introduce the content of that stanza in an admissible form, subject to service on defence counsel of a supplementary report containing the substance of the proposed...