R v Flentjar (No 4) [2008] NSWSC 650

R v Flentjar (No 4) [2008] NSWSC 650

The impugned remark had limited probative value because, in context, it was likely to indicate the accused's hostile views about persons he believed to be child molesters rather than an admission that he was present at or participated in the murders. There was a real likelihood the jury would impermissibly use it as such an admission, and the demeaning reference to the deceased reinforced the danger of unfair prejudice. The probative value was therefore outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice under s 137 of the Evidence Act.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
19 June 2008
Procedural Posture
Criminal Trial Evidentiary Ruling / Objection to Part of Conversations of the Accused Recorded by Listening Device
Outcome
Objection upheld.
Legal Topics
['listening Device Evidence' 'exclusion of Evidence' 'probative Value' 'unfair Prejudice' 'admissions']
['criminal Law' 'evidence Law'] ['listening Device Evidence' 'exclusion of Evidence' 'probative Value' 'unfair Prejudice' 'admissions']

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 Evidentiary Ruling / Objection to Part of Conversations of the Accused Recorded by Listening Device

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether a remark attributed to the accused in listening device material should be excluded under s 137 of the Evidence Act because its probative value was outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice.']

Ratio Decidendi

The impugned remark had limited probative value because, in context, it was likely to indicate the accused's hostile views about persons he believed to be child molesters rather than an admission that he was present at or participated in the murders. There was a real likelihood the jury would impermissibly use it as such an admission, and the demeaning reference to the deceased reinforced the danger of unfair prejudice. The probative value was therefore outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice under s 137 of the Evidence Act.

Court Disposition

Objection upheld.

Orders

  • ['The objection to the impugned listening device remark was upheld.']