R v Youseff (No 2) [2024] NSWSC 1260

R v Youseff (No 2) [2024] NSWSC 1260

The Cellebrite report data was excluded because it could not be shown to be an accurate record of the number of steps taken by the person in possession of the iPhone at or near the time recorded. The evidence was not relevant as there was no reliable basis to infer step count accuracy, proximate timing, or identity of movement with the accused. Even if relevant, any probative value was substantially outweighed by the danger the evidence might be misleading, and thus was excluded under s 135 Evidence Act.

Parties
Prosecution: Rex (Crown); Accused: Bahra Youseff
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
08 October 2024
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Interlocutory Evidentiary Ruling During Trial
Outcome
Application to admit Cellebrite report refused; evidence excluded.
Legal Topics
Admissibility of Hearsay Evidence, Digital Evidence, Process/machine Produced Documents, Forensic Evidence, Exclusion of Evidence
Evidence (criminal Law) Admissibility of Hearsay Evidence Digital Evidence Process/machine Produced Documents Forensic Evidence Exclusion 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 4 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rex (Crown)

Prosecution

Bahra Youseff

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Interlocutory Evidentiary Ruling During Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Cellebrite iPhone Health App data is admissible under Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) as an exception to hearsay
  2. 2 Whether evidence is reliable and not misleading
  3. 3 Applicability of ss 48, 55-56, 69, 135, 144, 146-147, 183 of the Evidence Act 1995

Ratio Decidendi

The Cellebrite report data was excluded because it could not be shown to be an accurate record of the number of steps taken by the person in possession of the iPhone at or near the time recorded. The evidence was not relevant as there was no reliable basis to infer step count accuracy, proximate timing, or identity of movement with the accused. Even if relevant, any probative value was substantially outweighed by the danger the evidence might be misleading, and thus was excluded under s 135 Evidence Act.

Court Disposition

Application to admit Cellebrite report refused; evidence excluded.

Orders

  • The Cellebrite report purportedly depicting the activity sensor data recorded on an Apple iPhone is excluded from evidence.