R v Duong [2024] NSWDC 470

R v Duong [2024] NSWDC 470

The accused's attempted suicide, temporally proximate to the disclosure of sexual abuse allegations, was capable of being an indication of consciousness of guilt and met the requisite preconditions for admissibility. The probative value was judged as substantial and not outweighed by any unfair prejudice, particularly with appropriate jury directions. Accordingly, the evidence was ruled admissible.

Parties
Accused: Tri Duong; Crown: Director of Public Prosecutions
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 June 2024
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Ruling on Crown Application to Adduce Evidence Pre Trial
Outcome
Crown application granted
Legal Topics
Consciousness of Guilt, Admissibility of Evidence, Post Offence Conduct, Suicide Attempt as 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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tri Duong

Accused

Director of Public Prosecutions

Crown

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Ruling on Crown Application to Adduce Evidence Pre Trial

  1. 1 Whether evidence of accused's attempted suicide is admissible as evidence of consciousness of guilt
  2. 2 Whether probative value of evidence is outweighed by unfair prejudice under s137 Evidence Act (NSW) 1995

Ratio Decidendi

The accused's attempted suicide, temporally proximate to the disclosure of sexual abuse allegations, was capable of being an indication of consciousness of guilt and met the requisite preconditions for admissibility. The probative value was judged as substantial and not outweighed by any unfair prejudice, particularly with appropriate jury directions. Accordingly, the evidence was ruled admissible.

Court Disposition

Crown application granted

Orders

  • Evidence of accused's suicide attempt is admissible as evidence of consciousness of guilt in respect of Counts 1 to 15 on the Indictment
  • Crown to provide appropriate draft jury direction