R v Al Batat & Ors (No 12) [2020] NSWSC 1129

R v Al Batat & Ors (No 12) [2020] NSWSC 1129

Evidence of a tendency to possess firearms by Mr Bayliss (based on possession of three firearms shortly after the alleged supply and his admissions in interview) has significant probative value and is admissible, whereas evidence from a single instance (the text message) or from Ms Sellers' account (not independent) does not. The risk of prejudice is manageable by direction and does not outweigh probative value, given the closeness in time and enduring nature of the tendency.

Parties
Prosecution: Regina; Accused: Abdallah Hassan Al Batat; Accused: Ying Cheng Luo; Accused: Ian Fan; Accused: Jaiyu Liu; Accused: Jacob Blake Bayliss; Accused: Nai An Li
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
26 August 2020
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Evidentiary Ruling (voir Dire) Before Trial
Outcome
Admissibility of tendency evidence determined: some evidence admitted, some excluded.
Legal Topics
Evidence, Tendency Evidence, Admissibility, Probative Value Vs Prejudice
Criminal Law Evidence Tendency Evidence Admissibility Probative Value Vs Prejudice

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 5 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Prosecution

Abdallah Hassan Al Batat

Accused

Ying Cheng Luo

Accused

Ian Fan

Accused

Jaiyu Liu

Accused

Jacob Blake Bayliss

Accused

Nai An Li

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Evidentiary Ruling (voir Dire) Before Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether specified evidence is admissible as tendency evidence under the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW)
  2. 2 Whether the probative value of the tendency evidence substantially outweighs prejudicial effect under s 101(2) Evidence Act 1995 (NSW)

Ratio Decidendi

Evidence of a tendency to possess firearms by Mr Bayliss (based on possession of three firearms shortly after the alleged supply and his admissions in interview) has significant probative value and is admissible, whereas evidence from a single instance (the text message) or from Ms Sellers' account (not independent) does not. The risk of prejudice is manageable by direction and does not outweigh probative value, given the closeness in time and enduring nature of the tendency.

Court Disposition

Admissibility of tendency evidence determined: some evidence admitted, some excluded.

Orders

  • The tendency evidence in paragraph [42] of Ms Sellers' Statement of 29 June 2017 is not admissible.
  • The evidence of the text message sent to Bradley Pattenden on 8 February 2017 is not admissible.