R (Cth) v Alqudsi (No 7) [2023] NSWSC 354

R (Cth) v Alqudsi (No 7) [2023] NSWSC 354

An extended unanimity direction was unnecessary because the particularised possible terrorist targets were not essential factual pathways to guilt. The offence was directing a terrorist organisation; the Crown did not need to prove discussion or identification of any specific target to prove that the organisation was involved in planning or fostering a terrorist act or that the accused knew it was such an organisation. The targets were evidence of the Shura's activities, context and the accused's knowledge, not discrete acts each capable of independently proving an essential ingredient. Because the Crown case depended on the substance of OA's evidence, a modified Shepherd direction would...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 April 2023
Procedural Posture
Criminal Procedural Ruling in Trial on a Charge of Directing a Terrorist Organisation / Ruling During Trial After the Close of Evidence on Whether to Give an Extended Unanimity Direction
Outcome
Extended unanimity direction unnecessary; modified Shepherd direction to be given in relation to OA's evidence.
Legal Topics
['extended Unanimity Direction' 'jury Directions' 'alternative Factual Pathways to Guilt' 'directing a Terrorist Organisation' 'modified Shepherd Direction']
['criminal Procedure' 'criminal Law'] ['extended Unanimity Direction' 'jury Directions' 'alternative Factual Pathways to Guilt' 'directing a Terrorist Organisation' 'modified Shepherd Direction']

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 Procedural Ruling in Trial on a Charge of Directing a Terrorist Organisation / Ruling During Trial After the Close of Evidence on Whether to Give an Extended Unanimity Direction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the jury should be given an extended unanimity direction requiring unanimity on at least one particular of the terrorist attack said to be planned.' "Whether the Crown's particularised possible targets were alternative factual pathways to guilt or merely evidence of the organisation's activities and the accused's knowledge." 'Whether a modified Shepherd direction should be given in relation to the evidence of OA.']

Ratio Decidendi

An extended unanimity direction was unnecessary because the particularised possible terrorist targets were not essential factual pathways to guilt. The offence was directing a terrorist organisation; the Crown did not need to prove discussion or identification of any specific target to prove that the organisation was involved in planning or fostering a terrorist act or that the accused knew it was such an organisation. The targets were evidence of the Shura's activities, context and the accused's knowledge, not discrete acts each capable of independently proving an essential ingredient. Because the Crown case depended on the substance of OA's evidence, a modified Shepherd direction would...

Court Disposition

Extended unanimity direction unnecessary; modified Shepherd direction to be given in relation to OA's evidence.

Orders

  • ['The Court would not direct the jury in a manner requiring unanimity on at least one of the particulars of the terrorist attack said to be planned.' "The Court would direct the jury that unless satisfied beyond reasonable doubt of the substance of OA's evidence in its entirety, it could not find the accused guilty...