R v T [2004] NSWSC 634

R v T [2004] NSWSC 634

The transcript evidence of S was admissible under s 65 because reasonable steps had been taken to find or secure the attendance of the overseas witness without success, and S's evidence had been extensively cross-examined in earlier trials. Any unfair prejudice arising from possible further fresh evidence about knives should be considered separately if and when that evidence was tendered, rather than preventing admission of S's prior evidence.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
29 June 2004
Procedural Posture
Murder Trial; Crown Application Pursuant to S 65 of the Evidence Act / Admissibility Ruling During Trial
Outcome
Crown application allowed; prior transcript evidence admitted and to be read to the jury.
Legal Topics
['hearsay' 'admissibility of Prior Evidence' 'unavailable Witness' 'evidence Act 1995 (nsw) S 65' 'unfair Prejudice' 'jury Warnings']
['criminal Law' 'evidence'] ['hearsay' 'admissibility of Prior Evidence' 'unavailable Witness' 'evidence Act 1995 (nsw) S 65' 'unfair Prejudice' 'jury Warnings']

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

Murder Trial; Crown Application Pursuant to S 65 of the Evidence Act / Admissibility Ruling During Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Crown could rely on s 65 of the Evidence Act to tender the examination-in-chief and cross-examination of an unavailable witness from an earlier trial.' 'Whether all reasonable steps had been taken to find the witness or secure his attendance.' 'Whether the accused would suffer unfair prejudice because the witness could not be cross-examined about possible further fresh evidence concerning knives.']

Ratio Decidendi

The transcript evidence of S was admissible under s 65 because reasonable steps had been taken to find or secure the attendance of the overseas witness without success, and S's evidence had been extensively cross-examined in earlier trials. Any unfair prejudice arising from possible further fresh evidence about knives should be considered separately if and when that evidence was tendered, rather than preventing admission of S's prior evidence.

Court Disposition

Crown application allowed; prior transcript evidence admitted and to be read to the jury.

Orders

  • ["The witness's evidence is admitted and is to be read to the jury." 'Any further tender of evidence that might have impacted on the cross-examination is to be considered in due course.']