R v Holman (No 1) [2024] NSWDC 267

R v Holman (No 1) [2024] NSWDC 267

The Crown proved beyond reasonable doubt Counts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 6 because the complainant's core allegations on those counts were accepted as honest and reliable when assessed with complaint evidence, circumstantial evidence and tendency evidence, despite inconsistencies and concerns about exaggeration. The Crown did not prove Count 5 beyond reasonable doubt because the alleged assault occasioning actual bodily harm at the motel was insufficiently corroborated, the evidence about marks or bruising was variable or absent, and the judge was left with a reasonable doubt whether the described physical assault causing actual bodily harm occurred.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
15 March 2024
Procedural Posture
Criminal Trial by Judge Alone / Reasons on Verdict After Trial
Outcome
Verdict of guilty on Counts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 6; verdict of not guilty on Count 5.
Legal Topics
['judge Alone Trial' 'verdict' 'intimidation' 'use Offensive Weapon With Intent to Commit Indictable Offence' 'common Assault' 'assault Occasioning Actual Bodily Harm' 'tendency Evidence' 'complaint Evidence' 'witness Reliability' 'burden and Standard of Proof']
['criminal Law' 'criminal Procedure' 'domestic Violence'] ['judge Alone Trial' 'verdict' 'intimidation' 'use Offensive Weapon With Intent to Commit Indictable Offence' 'common Assault' 'assault Occasioning Actual Bodily Harm' 'tendency Evidence' 'complaint Evidence' 'witness Reliability' 'burden and Standard of Proof']

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 by Judge Alone / Reasons on Verdict After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Crown proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused used an offensive weapon with intent to commit common assault in Count 1.' 'Whether the Crown proved beyond reasonable doubt intimidation of Brearn Morris in Counts 2, 3 and 6.' 'Whether the Crown proved beyond reasonable doubt common assault in Count 4 arising from the incident described as occurring in the forest.' 'Whether the Crown proved beyond reasonable doubt assault occasioning actual bodily harm in Count 5 arising from the alleged motel incident.' "Whether the complainant's evidence was sufficiently honest and reliable, taking into account complaint evidence, corroborative circumstances, tendency evidence, inconsistencies, and the defence allegation of methamphetamine use and exaggeration."]

Ratio Decidendi

The Crown proved beyond reasonable doubt Counts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 6 because the complainant's core allegations on those counts were accepted as honest and reliable when assessed with complaint evidence, circumstantial evidence and tendency evidence, despite inconsistencies and concerns about exaggeration. The Crown did not prove Count 5 beyond reasonable doubt because the alleged assault occasioning actual bodily harm at the motel was insufficiently corroborated, the evidence about marks or bruising was variable or absent, and the judge was left with a reasonable doubt whether the described physical assault causing actual bodily harm occurred.

Court Disposition

Verdict of guilty on Counts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 6; verdict of not guilty on Count 5.

Orders

  • ['Mr Holman will be convicted in relation to Counts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 6.' 'There will be a verdict of Not Guilty with respect to Count 5.']