R v J Lucas; R v B Lucas (No 5) [2022] NSWSC 1811

R v J Lucas; R v B Lucas (No 5) [2022] NSWSC 1811

The Court held that most of the alleged representations by Joshua Lucas were not admissible against Benjamin Lucas under s 87(1)(c) because, viewed in context, they were narrative, discussion, boasting, argument, ideological musing or conduct not shown to move forward the specific common purpose alleged between the two accused. Three representations were admissible: CCS [110], concerning Joshua Lucas seeking to join The Base and referring to friends also keen to join; CCS [229], limited to the explicit representation accompanying the posting of the substation photograph during an information-gathering discussion about explosive substances; and CCS [254], concerning "kits for surviving"...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
28 February 2022
Procedural Posture
Criminal Proceedings / Voir Dire Procedural Rulings on Admissibility of Evidence
Outcome
Various discrete rulings made; the majority of the representations were not admitted against Benjamin Lucas as admissions, while three were admitted, one on a limited basis.
Legal Topics
['hearsay' 'admissions' "co Conspirator's Rule" 'common Purpose' 'representations in Furtherance of Common Purpose' 'voir Dire']
['evidence' 'criminal Law' 'criminal Procedure'] ['hearsay' 'admissions' "co Conspirator's Rule" 'common Purpose' 'representations in Furtherance of Common Purpose' 'voir Dire']

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 Proceedings / Voir Dire Procedural Rulings on Admissibility of Evidence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether posts alleged to have been made by Joshua Lucas were admissible as to the truth of their contents against Benjamin Lucas pursuant to ss 59, 81 and 87 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW), particularly s 87(1)(c).' 'Whether the Crown had demonstrated on the balance of probabilities that it was reasonably open to find that the representations were made in furtherance of the common purpose alleged between Joshua Lucas and Benjamin Lucas.' 'Whether particular explicit, implied or inferred representations in the Crown case statement could be attributed to Benjamin Lucas as admissions of his own.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that most of the alleged representations by Joshua Lucas were not admissible against Benjamin Lucas under s 87(1)(c) because, viewed in context, they were narrative, discussion, boasting, argument, ideological musing or conduct not shown to move forward the specific common purpose alleged between the two accused. Three representations were admissible: CCS [110], concerning Joshua Lucas seeking to join The Base and referring to friends also keen to join; CCS [229], limited to the explicit representation accompanying the posting of the substation photograph during an information-gathering discussion about explosive substances; and CCS [254], concerning "kits for surviving"...

Court Disposition

Various discrete rulings made; the majority of the representations were not admitted against Benjamin Lucas as admissions, while three were admitted, one on a limited basis.

Orders

  • ['Representations in CCS [89] were not admitted against Benjamin Lucas as alleged admissions.' 'The contents of CCS [221] were not admitted against Benjamin Lucas as an inferred admission.' 'The representation in CCS [229] was admitted against Benjamin Lucas pursuant to s 87 only on the limited basis of the explicit...