R v SELIM [2007] NSWSC 362

R v SELIM [2007] NSWSC 362

The prosecution must prove that the accused knew the evidence may be required in Federal judicial proceedings as defined by s 31 of the Crimes Act 1914 (Cth); there being no evidence that the accused had such knowledge, a verdict of not guilty must be directed.

Parties
Accused: James Selim; Prosecution: The Crown (Cth)
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 April 2007
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Application for Directed Verdict at Close of Crown Case
Outcome
Directed verdicts of not guilty in respect of both counts on the indictment
Legal Topics
Destruction of Evidence, Directed Verdict, Fault Elements
Criminal Law Destruction of Evidence Directed Verdict Fault Elements

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 3 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

James Selim

Accused

The Crown (Cth)

Prosecution

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Application for Directed Verdict at Close of Crown Case

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Crown must prove accused knew evidence may be required in Federal judicial proceedings as defined in s 31 Crimes Act 1914 (Cth)
  2. 2 Whether evidence establishes requisite knowledge for offence under s 39 Crimes Act 1914 (Cth)

Ratio Decidendi

The prosecution must prove that the accused knew the evidence may be required in Federal judicial proceedings as defined by s 31 of the Crimes Act 1914 (Cth); there being no evidence that the accused had such knowledge, a verdict of not guilty must be directed.

Court Disposition

Directed verdicts of not guilty in respect of both counts on the indictment

Orders

  • Directed verdict of not guilty on count one
  • Withdrawal of second count from jury