R v Rahim; R v Rizk [2021] NSWSC 742

R v Rahim; R v Rizk [2021] NSWSC 742

Rahim's evidence of inducement and oppressive police conduct was rejected; his interview and subsequent admissions were found to be voluntary, made with understanding of his rights, and admissible. Rizk's arrest was objectively supported by reasonable suspicion based on intercepted calls and circumstantial evidence known at the time. Most of Rizk's interview was admissible; however, questions and answers 427–435 and 555–564 were unfair and excluded. Both accused's applications (notices of motion) for exclusion of interviews were, except as noted, dismissed.

Parties
Crown: Regina (Crown); Accused Rahim: Bilal Rahim; Accused Rizk: Sherene Rizk
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 June 2021
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Pre Trial Admissibility Ruling (voir Dire)
Outcome
Notices of Motion dismissed (except limited exclusion of interview evidence for Rizk)
Legal Topics
Murder, Accessory Before the Fact, Admissibility of Evidence, Electronically Recorded Interviews, Inducement, Lawfulness of Arrest, Reasonable Suspicion, Right to Silence, Improper Questioning
Criminal Law Evidence Murder Accessory Before the Fact Admissibility of Evidence Electronically Recorded Interviews Inducement Lawfulness of Arrest +3 more

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 6 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina (Crown)

Crown

Bilal Rahim

Accused Rahim

Sherene Rizk

Accused Rizk

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Pre Trial Admissibility Ruling (voir Dire)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether admissions made by Rahim and Rizk in police interviews should be excluded from evidence due to alleged inducement, oppression or unlawful conduct by police.
  2. 2 Whether Rizk's arrest was based on reasonable suspicion rendering her detention and interview lawful.
  3. 3 Whether the conduct of police during Rizk's interview infringed her right to silence such that the interview (or parts of it) should be excluded.

Ratio Decidendi

Rahim's evidence of inducement and oppressive police conduct was rejected; his interview and subsequent admissions were found to be voluntary, made with understanding of his rights, and admissible. Rizk's arrest was objectively supported by reasonable suspicion based on intercepted calls and circumstantial evidence known at the time. Most of Rizk's interview was admissible; however, questions and answers 427–435 and 555–564 were unfair and excluded. Both accused's applications (notices of motion) for exclusion of interviews were, except as noted, dismissed.

Court Disposition

Notices of Motion dismissed (except limited exclusion of interview evidence for Rizk)

Orders

  • The Notice of Motion filed by Rahim on 24 May 2021 is dismissed.
  • The Notice of Motion filed by Rizk on 25 May 2021 is dismissed, except with respect to Questions and Answers 427–435 and 555–564 of the interview of 17 December 2019, which are excluded from Crown evidence.