R v McParland; R v Wingate (No 3) [2011] NSWDC 266

R v McParland; R v Wingate (No 3) [2011] NSWDC 266

Although the accused was fit to be interviewed and gave articulate responses, his attempts to exercise his rights not to undergo the interview and to speak to a solicitor were overridden by the police, making it unfair to admit the interview evidence against him.

Parties
Prosecution: Regina (Crown); Accused: Troy McParland; Accused: Luke Wingate
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 July 2011
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Application to Tender Evidence at Trial
Outcome
Application to tender record of interview against accused Wingate refused.
Legal Topics
Judicial Discretion to Admit or Exclude Evidence, Unfairness of Admitting Evidence, Right to Legal Representation, Right to Silence

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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina (Crown)

Prosecution

Troy McParland

Accused

Luke Wingate

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Application to Tender Evidence at Trial

  1. 1 Whether the record of interview with accused Wingate should be admitted into evidence
  2. 2 Whether admitting the interview would be unfair in the circumstances as per Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) ss 85, 90, 135, 137

Ratio Decidendi

Although the accused was fit to be interviewed and gave articulate responses, his attempts to exercise his rights not to undergo the interview and to speak to a solicitor were overridden by the police, making it unfair to admit the interview evidence against him.

Court Disposition

Application to tender record of interview against accused Wingate refused.

Orders

  • Record of interview not admitted into evidence against Luke Wingate.