R v Adams (No 3) [2016] NSWSC 1405

R v Adams (No 3) [2016] NSWSC 1405

The identification evidence of the clog by Ms Parker is admissible because it meets the low threshold of relevance under s 55 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) and the High Court's guidance in IMM v The Queen dictates that the tribunal of fact must be assumed to accept the evidence for admissibility purposes. Questions regarding the weight and reliability of the evidence are for subsequent determination, not for exclusion at the admissibility stage.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
28 September 2016
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Evidence Admissibility Ruling (voir Dire)
Outcome
Evidence of Ms Parker's identification of the clog is admissible.
Legal Topics
['admissibility of Identification Evidence' 'relevance of Evidence']
['criminal Law' 'evidence'] ['admissibility of Identification Evidence' '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 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Evidence Admissibility Ruling (voir Dire)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether evidence of identification of footwear by Ms Parker, years after the event from a black and white photograph, is relevant and admissible pursuant to s 55 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW)']

Ratio Decidendi

The identification evidence of the clog by Ms Parker is admissible because it meets the low threshold of relevance under s 55 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) and the High Court's guidance in IMM v The Queen dictates that the tribunal of fact must be assumed to accept the evidence for admissibility purposes. Questions regarding the weight and reliability of the evidence are for subsequent determination, not for exclusion at the admissibility stage.

Court Disposition

Evidence of Ms Parker's identification of the clog is admissible.

Orders

  • ['The purported identification of the clog by Ms Parker is admissible in the trial.']