R v Tabbah; R v Tiriaki (No 5) [2014] NSWSC 568

R v Tabbah; R v Tiriaki (No 5) [2014] NSWSC 568

The evidence of Detective Sergeant Browne, Detective Ritchie and Mr Stevens established that when the CCTV footage that became exhibits 30 and 31 was inspected, the time recorded by the CCTV system was about four minutes out, and the mobile phones used to check that time were themselves subject to the s 146 presumption of accuracy. Although later daylight footage showed an incorrect time change while police were with Mr Stevens, that did not make the earlier footage irrelevant or inadmissible because it remained footage taken in close proximity to the time Mathew Hedges was shot.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
28 April 2014
Procedural Posture
Criminal Proceeding / Procedural Evidentiary Ruling on Renewed Application Challenging Admissibility of CCTV Footage
Outcome
Evidence admissible; renewed application refused.
Legal Topics
['cctv Footage' 'relevance' 'probative Value and Unfair Prejudice' 'presumptions for Evidence Produced by Processes, Machines and Other Devices' 'admissibility of Evidence']
['criminal Law' 'evidence'] ['cctv Footage' 'relevance' 'probative Value and Unfair Prejudice' 'presumptions for Evidence Produced by Processes, Machines and Other Devices' 'admissibility 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 Proceeding / Procedural Evidentiary Ruling on Renewed Application Challenging Admissibility of CCTV Footage

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether exhibits 30 and 31, being CCTV footage from cameras at the National Archive, were relevant and admissible.' 'Whether further CCTV footage displaced the presumption under s 146 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) so that the Crown could not establish that exhibits 30 and 31 showed a relevant period.' 'Whether the footage was inadmissible under s 55 or s 137 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW).']

Ratio Decidendi

The evidence of Detective Sergeant Browne, Detective Ritchie and Mr Stevens established that when the CCTV footage that became exhibits 30 and 31 was inspected, the time recorded by the CCTV system was about four minutes out, and the mobile phones used to check that time were themselves subject to the s 146 presumption of accuracy. Although later daylight footage showed an incorrect time change while police were with Mr Stevens, that did not make the earlier footage irrelevant or inadmissible because it remained footage taken in close proximity to the time Mathew Hedges was shot.

Court Disposition

Evidence admissible; renewed application refused.

Orders

  • ['The renewed application in relation to the admission of exhibits 30 and 31 as irrelevant is refused.']