R v Taleb (No 4) [2019] NSWSC 398

R v Taleb (No 4) [2019] NSWSC 398

The nominated acts in the indictment were particulars of the alleged preparatory conduct, so the prosecution did not have to prove all seven acts but did have to prove one or more acts unanimously found by the jury to constitute preparatory conduct done with intention. Because there was evidence capable of establishing the challenged act concerning an attempt to obtain money from a relative, the application for a directed verdict of acquittal failed. The jury would not be directed to consider mental impairment before fault, and the Prosecutor could not use the Bosnia statement as consciousness of guilt because that reasoning would be circular.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
02 April 2019
Procedural Posture
Criminal Trial Concerning an Offence of Doing Acts Preparatory to a Foreign Incursion Offence / Procedural and Other Rulings at the Close of the Evidence, Including an Application for a Directed Verdict of Acquittal
Outcome
Application for a directed verdict of acquittal dismissed; procedural rulings made for counsel addresses and jury directions.
Legal Topics
['directed Verdict of Acquittal' 'particulars in Indictment' 'unanimity of Jury' 'foreign Incursion Offence' 'fault Element of Intention' 'mental Impairment' 'consciousness of Guilt' 'lies' 'entrapment']
['criminal Law' 'criminal Procedure'] ['directed Verdict of Acquittal' 'particulars in Indictment' 'unanimity of Jury' 'foreign Incursion Offence' 'fault Element of Intention' 'mental Impairment' 'consciousness of Guilt' 'lies' 'entrapment']

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 Trial Concerning an Offence of Doing Acts Preparatory to a Foreign Incursion Offence / Procedural and Other Rulings at the Close of the Evidence, Including an Application for a Directed Verdict of Acquittal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the prosecution needed to establish all seven particular acts alleged in the indictment' 'Whether the jury should be directed to return a verdict of not guilty' 'What direction should be given on the fault element of intention' 'Whether the jury should be directed to consider mental impairment before the fault element' 'Whether the Prosecutor could put that the accused acted with consciousness of guilt when he told police he was going to Bosnia as a tourist' 'Whether the jury should be directed that there is no defence of entrapment in Australia']

Ratio Decidendi

The nominated acts in the indictment were particulars of the alleged preparatory conduct, so the prosecution did not have to prove all seven acts but did have to prove one or more acts unanimously found by the jury to constitute preparatory conduct done with intention. Because there was evidence capable of establishing the challenged act concerning an attempt to obtain money from a relative, the application for a directed verdict of acquittal failed. The jury would not be directed to consider mental impairment before fault, and the Prosecutor could not use the Bosnia statement as consciousness of guilt because that reasoning would be circular.

Court Disposition

Application for a directed verdict of acquittal dismissed; procedural rulings made for counsel addresses and jury directions.

Orders

  • ['The prosecution need not prove all seven acts nominated in the indictment; the jury must be satisfied of at least one act and be unanimous in relation to the same act or acts.' 'The application for a directed verdict of acquittal is dismissed.' 'The jury will be directed in accordance with the revised draft...