R v Green (No 5) [2021] NSWSC 1305

R v Green (No 5) [2021] NSWSC 1305

The prejudicial effect of admitting the hearsay evidence was not sufficient to outweigh its probative value, particularly given the judge alone trial and the transparency and potential for judicial self-warning, so all of Mr Enks's statement is admissible.

Parties
Crown: Regina; Accused: Jesse Leigh Green
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 July 2021
Procedural Posture
Criminal Proceeding / Interlocutory Evidentiary Ruling During Special Hearing, Judge Alone Trial
Outcome
Statement admitted as evidence
Legal Topics
Hearsay Evidence, Admissibility, Unfair Prejudice, Judge Alone Trial
Evidence Law Criminal Law Hearsay Evidence Admissibility Unfair Prejudice Judge Alone Trial

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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Crown

Jesse Leigh Green

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Proceeding / Interlocutory Evidentiary Ruling During Special Hearing, Judge Alone Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the hearsay statement of Mr Kim Enks is admissible under s 65 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW)
  2. 2 Whether the danger of unfair prejudice outweighs the probative value under s 137 Evidence Act 1995 (NSW)

Ratio Decidendi

The prejudicial effect of admitting the hearsay evidence was not sufficient to outweigh its probative value, particularly given the judge alone trial and the transparency and potential for judicial self-warning, so all of Mr Enks's statement is admissible.

Court Disposition

Statement admitted as evidence

Orders

  • The whole of the statement of Mr Kim Enks is admissible