R v Lomas [2010] NSWDC 112

R v Lomas [2010] NSWDC 112

Taking the Crown case at its highest, the DNA evidence found on both sides of the scarf, the absence of any other person's DNA on the scarf, and the limited additional circumstantial evidence about the accused's connection with the shopping centre, appearance and clothing provided evidence on which a jury could convict; the judge therefore had to leave the matter to the jury with appropriate directions rather than direct an acquittal.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 April 2010
Procedural Posture
Criminal Trial for Robbery in Company / At the Conclusion of the Crown Case, Application for a Direction to the Jury to Acquit
Outcome
Application for a direction to acquit refused; matter left to the jury with appropriate directions.
Legal Topics
['identification Evidence' 'dna Evidence' 'direction to Acquit' 'robbery in Company']
['criminal Law' 'evidence'] ['identification Evidence' 'dna Evidence' 'direction to Acquit' 'robbery in Company']

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 Trial for Robbery in Company / At the Conclusion of the Crown Case, Application for a Direction to the Jury to Acquit

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether, taking the Crown case at its highest, there was evidence on which the jury could convict the accused.' 'Whether DNA evidence found on a scarf allegedly worn by one robber, together with other circumstantial evidence, required the matter to be left to the jury.']

Ratio Decidendi

Taking the Crown case at its highest, the DNA evidence found on both sides of the scarf, the absence of any other person's DNA on the scarf, and the limited additional circumstantial evidence about the accused's connection with the shopping centre, appearance and clothing provided evidence on which a jury could convict; the judge therefore had to leave the matter to the jury with appropriate directions rather than direct an acquittal.

Court Disposition

Application for a direction to acquit refused; matter left to the jury with appropriate directions.

Orders

  • ['The matter is to be left for the jury.' 'Appropriate directions are to be given to the jury.']