R v Barakat (No 8) [2016] NSWSC 1382
Although the Crown case was completely circumstantial and very weak, the evidence, taken at its highest, had the capacity to establish beyond reasonable doubt that the accused was in the silver Subaru WRX in Thorpe Place on the morning of 12 July 2013 as either the shooter or the driver. In particular, assuming the vehicle was Younes' car, the accused had borrowed it, was the person who returned it shortly after the shooting, and the timing and other surrounding circumstances went slightly beyond mere opportunity. There was therefore no evidentiary defect requiring a directed acquittal, and the case had to be left to the jury.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 29 September 2016
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Proceeding for Murder / Accused's Application for a Verdict by Direction/no Case to Answer After the Crown Closed Its Case
- Outcome
- The application for a verdict by direction is refused.
- Legal Topics
- ['murder' 'circumstantial Evidence' 'directed Verdict of Acquittal' 'no Case to Answer' 'joint Criminal Enterprise']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Criminal Proceeding for Murder / Accused's Application for a Verdict by Direction/no Case to Answer After the Crown Closed Its Case
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether the Crown evidence, taken at its highest, was capable of proving beyond reasonable doubt that the accused was either the shooter or the driver in the silver Subaru WRX in Thorpe Place on 12 July 2013.' 'Whether the circumstantial evidence went beyond mere opportunity and was capable of supporting an inference that the accused participated in the murder by joint criminal enterprise.']
Ratio Decidendi
Although the Crown case was completely circumstantial and very weak, the evidence, taken at its highest, had the capacity to establish beyond reasonable doubt that the accused was in the silver Subaru WRX in Thorpe Place on the morning of 12 July 2013 as either the shooter or the driver. In particular, assuming the vehicle was Younes' car, the accused had borrowed it, was the person who returned it shortly after the shooting, and the timing and other surrounding circumstances went slightly beyond mere opportunity. There was therefore no evidentiary defect requiring a directed acquittal, and the case had to be left to the jury.
Court Disposition
The application for a verdict by direction is refused.
Orders
- ['The application for a verdict by direction is refused.']
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment