R v Woods; R v Hayes; R v McLachlan; R v Harding; R v Farnsworth [2023] NSWSC 1163

R v Woods; R v Hayes; R v McLachlan; R v Harding; R v Farnsworth [2023] NSWSC 1163

The procedure under s 32(3) of the Evidence Act, allowing previous representations in police statements to be read aloud when a witness has impaired memory, does not transform those representations from hearsay into non-hearsay for warning purposes. Given the inability to test the evidence through cross-examination and the inherent unreliability, a judicial warning to the jury under s 165 is appropriate.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
26 September 2023
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Procedural Ruling During Trial
Outcome
Application Granted
Legal Topics
['hearsay Evidence' 'jury Directions' 'witness Memory' 'evidence Law' 'unreliable Evidence' 'section 32 Evidence Act' 'section 165 Evidence Act']
['criminal Law'] ['hearsay Evidence' 'jury Directions' 'witness Memory' 'evidence Law' 'unreliable Evidence' 'section 32 Evidence Act' 'section 165 Evidence Act']

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 During Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether previous representations made by a witness in police statements, read aloud pursuant to s 32(3) of the Evidence Act, are hearsay' 'Whether a jury direction warning of possible unreliability of such evidence is required under s 165 of the Evidence Act']

Ratio Decidendi

The procedure under s 32(3) of the Evidence Act, allowing previous representations in police statements to be read aloud when a witness has impaired memory, does not transform those representations from hearsay into non-hearsay for warning purposes. Given the inability to test the evidence through cross-examination and the inherent unreliability, a judicial warning to the jury under s 165 is appropriate.

Court Disposition

Application Granted

Orders

  • ["Application to direct jury as to possible unreliability of Mr Ney's evidence is granted."]