R v Mapp [2024] NSWSC 1267
The application for trial by judge alone was refused as the court was not satisfied that any prejudicial matters raised by the accused could not be cured by limiting evidence and/or judicial directions, and that the defence of substantial impairment involves an application of objective community standards, which is best determined by a jury.
- Parties
- Prosecutor: Rex (Crown); Accused: David Mapp
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 10 October 2024
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal / Pre Trial Application for Trial by Judge Alone
- Outcome
- Application refused
- Legal Topics
- Murder, Trial by Judge Alone, Partial Defence Substantial Impairment, Self Defence, Community Standards, Prejudicial Evidence
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Rex (Crown)
Prosecutor
David Mapp
Accused
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Pre Trial Application for Trial by Judge Alone
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether it is in the interests of justice to order a trial by judge alone under ss 132 and 132A of the Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW)
- 2 Whether substantial impairment defence involves application of community standards warranting trial by jury
- 3 Whether prejudicial evidence relevant to expert opinions prevents a fair jury trial
Ratio Decidendi
The application for trial by judge alone was refused as the court was not satisfied that any prejudicial matters raised by the accused could not be cured by limiting evidence and/or judicial directions, and that the defence of substantial impairment involves an application of objective community standards, which is best determined by a jury.
Court Disposition
Application refused
Orders
- The application for trial by judge alone 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