R v Weismantel (No 1) [2015] NSWDC 122

R v Weismantel (No 1) [2015] NSWDC 122

The Crown had given reasonable notice and, when refined, the coincidence evidence had sufficient specificity. The evidence had significant probative value because of the similarities between the two armed robberies, the involvement of a group of four offenders, the use of the same stolen Nissan Pulsar, objective travel evidence, evidence connecting the accused to the group after the vehicle was burnt, the accused's DNA on a packet of cigarettes dropped by the offender with the white head covering at the hotel, similarities in bodily habitus with the offender at the cinema, and the geographical proximity of relevant locations. Any prejudicial effect was substantially outweighed by...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 June 2015
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Crown Application for Leave to Adduce Coincidence Evidence
Outcome
Leave granted to the Crown to adduce the evidence relied upon as coincidence evidence.
Legal Topics
['coincidence Evidence' 'joint Criminal Enterprise' 'armed Robbery' 'probative Value and Prejudicial Effect']
['criminal Law' 'evidence'] ['coincidence Evidence' 'joint Criminal Enterprise' 'armed Robbery' '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 / Crown Application for Leave to Adduce Coincidence Evidence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Crown should be granted leave to adduce evidence as coincidence evidence.' 'Whether the evidence had significant probative value under s 98 of the Evidence Act 1995.' 'Whether the probative value of the coincidence evidence substantially outweighed any prejudicial effect under s 101 of the Evidence Act 1995.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Crown had given reasonable notice and, when refined, the coincidence evidence had sufficient specificity. The evidence had significant probative value because of the similarities between the two armed robberies, the involvement of a group of four offenders, the use of the same stolen Nissan Pulsar, objective travel evidence, evidence connecting the accused to the group after the vehicle was burnt, the accused's DNA on a packet of cigarettes dropped by the offender with the white head covering at the hotel, similarities in bodily habitus with the offender at the cinema, and the geographical proximity of relevant locations. Any prejudicial effect was substantially outweighed by...

Court Disposition

Leave granted to the Crown to adduce the evidence relied upon as coincidence evidence.

Orders

  • ['Grant leave to the Crown to adduce the evidence relied upon as coincidence evidence.']