R v MEYN, John Michael (No 5) [2012] NSWSC 1590
The proposed evidence of the deceased's complaint of a previous assault by the accused was tendency evidence. It did not have significant probative value because little was known about what precipitated the earlier aggression, the manner of the alleged assault was not shown to be sufficiently similar to the killing, and a single prior incident lacked sufficiently common features with the events of the deceased's death.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 03 December 2012
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Trial / Interlocutory Evidentiary Ruling During Trial
- Outcome
- Evidence of prior assault of deceased rejected.
- Legal Topics
- ['domestic Homicide' 'prior Domestic Violence' 'relationship Evidence' 'tendency Evidence' 'significant Probative Value']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Criminal Trial / Interlocutory Evidentiary Ruling During Trial
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether evidence from Ms Angela Walkerden that the deceased said the accused had previously assaulted her was admissible.' 'Whether the proposed evidence was relationship evidence or tendency evidence requiring satisfaction of s 97 and s 101 of the Evidence Act 1995.' 'Whether the proposed evidence had significant probative value.']
Ratio Decidendi
The proposed evidence of the deceased's complaint of a previous assault by the accused was tendency evidence. It did not have significant probative value because little was known about what precipitated the earlier aggression, the manner of the alleged assault was not shown to be sufficiently similar to the killing, and a single prior incident lacked sufficiently common features with the events of the deceased's death.
Court Disposition
Evidence of prior assault of deceased rejected.
Orders
- ['The evidence from Ms Angela Walkerden that the deceased told her the accused had assaulted her was rejected.']
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment