R v Thomas Sam; R v Manju Sam (No. 14) [2009] NSWSC 561

R v Thomas Sam; R v Manju Sam (No. 14) [2009] NSWSC 561

The Crown was permitted to provide the list because the document was expressed in balanced terms, would assist the jury in following the Crown closing address and later considering the lengthy recorded interviews, would reduce distraction and risk of error from jurors writing down topics and references, and would not operate unfairly to the accused, particularly where the defence could prepare a similar document subject to objection.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
29 May 2009
Procedural Posture
Criminal Jury Trial / Procedural Ruling on Objection to Provision to Jury During Crown Closing Address of List of References to Topics in Record of Interview
Outcome
Crown application allowed; objection by Manju Sam rejected.
Legal Topics
['jury Trial' 'records of Interview' 'provision of Aide Memoire or Summary Documents to Jury' 'crown Closing Address' 'discretionary Fairness to Accused']
['criminal Law' 'evidence' 'criminal Procedure'] ['jury Trial' 'records of Interview' 'provision of Aide Memoire or Summary Documents to Jury' 'crown Closing Address' 'discretionary Fairness to Accused']

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 Jury Trial / Procedural Ruling on Objection to Provision to Jury During Crown Closing Address of List of References to Topics in Record of Interview

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the Crown should be permitted to provide the jury during the Crown closing address with a document listing topics and cross-references to answers in each accused's record of interview." 'Whether provision of the document would unfairly prejudice Manju Sam by giving undue emphasis to aspects of the Crown case.' 'Whether the document would provide practical assistance to the jury in considering lengthy recorded interviews.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Crown was permitted to provide the list because the document was expressed in balanced terms, would assist the jury in following the Crown closing address and later considering the lengthy recorded interviews, would reduce distraction and risk of error from jurors writing down topics and references, and would not operate unfairly to the accused, particularly where the defence could prepare a similar document subject to objection.

Court Disposition

Crown application allowed; objection by Manju Sam rejected.

Orders

  • ['The Crown was permitted to provide lists of references to topics in the record of interview of each accused to the jury during the Crown closing address.']