R v J Lucas; R v B Lucas (No 9) [2022] NSWSC 1815

R v J Lucas; R v B Lucas (No 9) [2022] NSWSC 1815

Evidence of lay opinion of Mr Prothero is inadmissible pursuant to s 76 of the Evidence Act. Screenshots of conversations (annexure B), excluding lay opinion, are probative and admissible as they are relevant and not unfairly prejudicial. Acts of the witness founded upon their opinion are also inadmissible for lack of relevance. Evidence in annexure C is excluded due to inability to determine whether it is primary evidence or inadmissible opinion, and the risk of unfair prejudice under s 137.

Parties
Prosecution: Regina; Accused: Joshua Lucas; Accused: Benjamin Lucas
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
02 May 2022
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Interlocutory Evidentiary Ruling
Outcome
Evidence of lay opinion inadmissible; screenshots admissible
Legal Topics
Lay Opinion Evidence, Admissibility of Evidence, Probative Value, Relevance, Unfair Prejudice
Evidence Law Criminal Procedure Lay Opinion Evidence Admissibility of Evidence Probative Value Relevance Unfair Prejudice

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 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Prosecution

Joshua Lucas

Accused

Benjamin Lucas

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Interlocutory Evidentiary Ruling

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether lay opinion evidence of Mr Prothero is admissible
  2. 2 Whether screenshots of conversations are admissible as evidence
  3. 3 Whether subsequent acts by the witness based on their opinion are admissible

Ratio Decidendi

Evidence of lay opinion of Mr Prothero is inadmissible pursuant to s 76 of the Evidence Act. Screenshots of conversations (annexure B), excluding lay opinion, are probative and admissible as they are relevant and not unfairly prejudicial. Acts of the witness founded upon their opinion are also inadmissible for lack of relevance. Evidence in annexure C is excluded due to inability to determine whether it is primary evidence or inadmissible opinion, and the risk of unfair prejudice under s 137.

Court Disposition

Evidence of lay opinion inadmissible; screenshots admissible

Orders

  • Lay opinion evidence of Mr Prothero excluded
  • Screenshots of conversations in annexure B admissible