R v Warren ROSS (No 2) [2013] NSWSC 2042

R v Warren ROSS (No 2) [2013] NSWSC 2042

The admitted Crown tendency evidence concerned conduct toward this particular deceased at or about the time of the alleged fatal injuries and was directed to important issues including identity, state of mind, motive, and whether innocent or alternative-perpetrator explanations were reasonably open. If accepted, that evidence had significant probative value, and its probative value substantially outweighed its prejudicial effect when expected directions about its use were taken into account. Evidence from Mr Shelton, Mr Merritt, Ms Hannan and the younger of the two older sisters lacked sufficient detail or probative force and did not satisfy ss 97 and 101.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
25 October 2013
Procedural Posture
Criminal Proceeding; Charge of Murder / Preliminary Hearing; Interlocutory Application and Ruling on Admissibility and Use of Tendency Evidence
Outcome
Application to reject Ms Deaves' evidence on the basis of impropriety was rejected; Crown tendency evidence was admitted and allowed for tendency use in part and rejected in part.
Legal Topics
['admissibility of Tendency Evidence' 'preliminary Ruling' 'evidence of Past Abuse of Deceased by Accused' 'impropriety in Obtaining Evidence' 'probative Value and Prejudicial Effect']
['criminal Law' 'evidence'] ['admissibility of Tendency Evidence' 'preliminary Ruling' 'evidence of Past Abuse of Deceased by Accused' 'impropriety in Obtaining Evidence' 'probative Value and Prejudicial Effect']

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; Charge of Murder / Preliminary Hearing; Interlocutory Application and Ruling on Admissibility and Use of Tendency Evidence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether evidence identified in the Crown Tendency Notice was admissible and able to be used as tendency evidence against the accused under the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW).' 'Whether the evidence had significant probative value under s 97 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW).' 'Whether the probative value of the prosecution tendency evidence substantially outweighed any prejudicial effect under s 101 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW).' 'Whether evidence of Ms Deaves should be rejected on the basis of impropriety in the manner in which it was said to have been obtained.']

Ratio Decidendi

The admitted Crown tendency evidence concerned conduct toward this particular deceased at or about the time of the alleged fatal injuries and was directed to important issues including identity, state of mind, motive, and whether innocent or alternative-perpetrator explanations were reasonably open. If accepted, that evidence had significant probative value, and its probative value substantially outweighed its prejudicial effect when expected directions about its use were taken into account. Evidence from Mr Shelton, Mr Merritt, Ms Hannan and the younger of the two older sisters lacked sufficient detail or probative force and did not satisfy ss 97 and 101.

Court Disposition

Application to reject Ms Deaves' evidence on the basis of impropriety was rejected; Crown tendency evidence was admitted and allowed for tendency use in part and rejected in part.

Orders

  • ['Because the Crown no longer presses the evidence, it is unnecessary to state an attitude to the admissibility of the conversation between Ms X and Ms Deaves.' 'As to the remainder of the application to reject evidence on the basis of impropriety in the manner in which it is said to have been obtained, the...