R v Haile [2023] NSWSC 351

R v Haile [2023] NSWSC 351

The Edwards direction was declined because the accused opposed revisiting potentially inculpatory evidence, accepted that he was foregoing any benefit from the cautionary part of the direction, and no authority required the direction to be given despite the accused's opposition. The s 165(b) warning was declined on the basis of Proud v R (No 2) [2016] NSWCCA 44 at [68] – [73].

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
12 April 2023
Procedural Posture
Criminal Trial / Procedural Ruling on Crown Request for Jury Directions During Summing Up
Outcome
Crown request for directions refused
Legal Topics
['jury Directions' 'post Offence Conduct' 'consciousness of Guilt' 'edwards Direction' 'evidence Act 1995 (nsw) S 165(b) Warning' 'lies']
['criminal Law' 'evidence'] ['jury Directions' 'post Offence Conduct' 'consciousness of Guilt' 'edwards Direction' 'evidence Act 1995 (nsw) S 165(b) Warning' 'lies']

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 / Procedural Ruling on Crown Request for Jury Directions During Summing Up

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether an Edwards direction concerning post-offence conduct said to demonstrate consciousness of guilt should be given where the Crown sought the direction during summing up and the accused opposed it.' 'Whether a warning under Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) s 165(b) should be given concerning alleged lies told by the accused in the course of his first trial in 2016.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Edwards direction was declined because the accused opposed revisiting potentially inculpatory evidence, accepted that he was foregoing any benefit from the cautionary part of the direction, and no authority required the direction to be given despite the accused's opposition. The s 165(b) warning was declined on the basis of Proud v R (No 2) [2016] NSWCCA 44 at [68] – [73].

Court Disposition

Crown request for directions refused

Orders

  • ['Crown request for directions refused']