R v Rogerson; R v McNamara (No 49) [2016] NSWSC 577

R v Rogerson; R v McNamara (No 49) [2016] NSWSC 577

When the evidence was read as a whole, the cross-examination was directed to the nature and extent of the relationship between the two accused, not to a conscious and deliberate attempt to raise Rogerson's character. Because the proposed re-examination depended on Rogerson's character having been raised, it was not permitted.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 May 2016
Procedural Posture
Criminal Law Procedural Ruling Concerning Evidence and Re Examination / Ruling During Trial on Proposed Re Examination of the Accused Mc Namara
Outcome
Proposed re-examination not permitted.
Legal Topics
['cross Examination as to Character' 're Examination' 'character Evidence of Accused Persons' 'evidence Act 1995 (nsw) S. 110' 'evidence Act 1995 (nsw) S. 39']
['criminal Law' 'evidence'] ['cross Examination as to Character' 're Examination' 'character Evidence of Accused Persons' 'evidence Act 1995 (nsw) S. 110' 'evidence Act 1995 (nsw) S. 39']

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 Law Procedural Ruling Concerning Evidence and Re Examination / Ruling During Trial on Proposed Re Examination of the Accused Mc Namara

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether questions put to McNamara in cross-examination about inscriptions in books given to Rogerson amounted to adducing evidence that Rogerson was generally a person of good character.' 'Whether McNamara should be permitted in re-examination to say he no longer regarded Rogerson as a person of wisdom and to explain that view by reference to alleged manipulation, fabrication or collusion.' 'Whether the proposed re-examination arose out of cross-examination.']

Ratio Decidendi

When the evidence was read as a whole, the cross-examination was directed to the nature and extent of the relationship between the two accused, not to a conscious and deliberate attempt to raise Rogerson's character. Because the proposed re-examination depended on Rogerson's character having been raised, it was not permitted.

Court Disposition

Proposed re-examination not permitted.

Orders

  • ['The proposed re-examination of the accused McNamara should not be permitted.']