R v Warwick (No.38) [2018] NSWSC 1285

R v Warwick (No.38) [2018] NSWSC 1285

The running sheet was relevant to counts involving Events 6 and 7 and to rebut an attack on the competence of the investigation. The previous representation was admissible under s 66 of the Evidence Act 1995 because Mr Barnes, the maker of the representation, was intended to be called as a witness, and the opinion recorded on 13 August 1985 about materials received and examined on 12 August 1985 was fresh in memory when made. No exclusionary or limiting submission was made under ss 135, 137 or 136. The document was admitted as Exhibit 66.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
15 August 2018
Procedural Posture
Common Law Criminal / Procedural Ruling on Objection to Admission of Evidence
Outcome
Objection overruled; document admitted into evidence.
Legal Topics
['hearsay' 'exceptions to Hearsay Rule' 'maker Available' 'freshness in Memory' 'admissibility of Documentary Evidence']
['evidence' 'criminal Law'] ['hearsay' 'exceptions to Hearsay Rule' 'maker Available' 'freshness in Memory' 'admissibility of Documentary Evidence']

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

Common Law Criminal / Procedural Ruling on Objection to Admission of Evidence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the running sheet containing a previous representation by Mr Barnes was admissible notwithstanding the hearsay objection.' 'Whether the requirements of s 66 of the Evidence Act 1995 were satisfied because the occurrence of the asserted fact was fresh in the memory of the person who made the representation.' 'Whether the document should be admitted where no objection was advanced under ss 135, 137 or 136 of the Evidence Act.']

Ratio Decidendi

The running sheet was relevant to counts involving Events 6 and 7 and to rebut an attack on the competence of the investigation. The previous representation was admissible under s 66 of the Evidence Act 1995 because Mr Barnes, the maker of the representation, was intended to be called as a witness, and the opinion recorded on 13 August 1985 about materials received and examined on 12 August 1985 was fresh in memory when made. No exclusionary or limiting submission was made under ss 135, 137 or 136. The document was admitted as Exhibit 66.

Court Disposition

Objection overruled; document admitted into evidence.

Orders

  • ['Pursuant to s 66 of the Evidence Act 1995, the document is admitted and marked as Exhibit 66.']