R v Warwick (No.80) [2020] NSWSC 115

R v Warwick (No.80) [2020] NSWSC 115

The Crown case, taken at its highest, involved admissible circumstantial evidence—including coincidence/tendency reasoning, DNA evidence, opportunity, similarity in method, and facts relating to motive—which was sufficient in law to require the Accused to answer the charges; thus, the application for verdicts of not guilty for no case to answer was dismissed.

Parties
Prosecution: The Crown; Accused: Leonard John Warwick
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 February 2020
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Trial Judge Alone No Case to Answer Submission
Outcome
Application for entry of verdicts of not guilty on the basis of no case to answer is dismissed.
Legal Topics
No Case to Answer Submission, Circumstantial Evidence, Coincidence and Tendency Evidence, Murder, Explosives Offences, Grievous Bodily Harm
Criminal Law No Case to Answer Submission Circumstantial Evidence Coincidence and Tendency Evidence Murder Explosives Offences Grievous Bodily Harm

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 5 Authorities cited 27 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Crown

Prosecution

Leonard John Warwick

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Trial Judge Alone No Case to Answer Submission

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the evidence led by the Crown, taken at its highest, is capable of supporting a verdict of guilty on each of the counts on the Indictment
  2. 2 Whether the circumstantial evidence is sufficient to require the Accused to answer the case
  3. 3 Whether the evidence is capable of showing that the Accused was responsible for the offences charged

Ratio Decidendi

The Crown case, taken at its highest, involved admissible circumstantial evidence—including coincidence/tendency reasoning, DNA evidence, opportunity, similarity in method, and facts relating to motive—which was sufficient in law to require the Accused to answer the charges; thus, the application for verdicts of not guilty for no case to answer was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application for entry of verdicts of not guilty on the basis of no case to answer is dismissed.

Orders

  • Application for the entry of verdicts of not guilty on the basis that the Accused has no case to answer is dismissed.