R v Martin (No 4) [2017] NSWSC 1291

R v Martin (No 4) [2017] NSWSC 1291

Photograph 65 was not admissible because it added little, if anything, to other evidence about whether injuries could be seen and any probative value was outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice. Photograph 29 was not admissible because, although it had some probative value, it was particularly graphic, largely duplicative of photograph 35, and likely to arouse unnecessary emotion. The remaining post-mortem photographs were admissible because they were relevant to the nature and number of wounds, the alleged use of a samurai sword, and the Crown case, had reasonably high probative value when considered globally, and any potential prejudice could be addressed by jury directions.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 September 2017
Procedural Posture
Criminal Trial Evidentiary Ruling / Voir Dire Objection to Admissibility of Photographs During Trial
Outcome
Photographs 29 and 65 are not admissible. The remaining post mortem photographs are admissible.
Legal Topics
['post Mortem Photographs' 'photograph of Deceased in Situ at Murder Scene' 'probative Value' 'unfair Prejudice' 'evidence Act 1995 (nsw), S 137']
['criminal Law' 'evidence'] ['post Mortem Photographs' 'photograph of Deceased in Situ at Murder Scene' 'probative Value' 'unfair Prejudice' 'evidence Act 1995 (nsw), S 137']

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 / Voir Dire Objection to Admissibility of Photographs During Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether photograph 65 of the deceased in situ should be admitted despite its graphic nature and alleged probative value concerning the accused's claimed observations." "Whether photograph 29, a close-up post-mortem photograph of a wound to the victim's throat, should be admitted despite its prejudicial effect." 'Whether the remaining post-mortem photographs were relevant and sufficiently probative to be admitted.']

Ratio Decidendi

Photograph 65 was not admissible because it added little, if anything, to other evidence about whether injuries could be seen and any probative value was outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice. Photograph 29 was not admissible because, although it had some probative value, it was particularly graphic, largely duplicative of photograph 35, and likely to arouse unnecessary emotion. The remaining post-mortem photographs were admissible because they were relevant to the nature and number of wounds, the alleged use of a samurai sword, and the Crown case, had reasonably high probative value when considered globally, and any potential prejudice could be addressed by jury directions.

Court Disposition

Photographs 29 and 65 are not admissible. The remaining post mortem photographs are admissible.

Orders

  • ['Photographs 29 and 65 are excluded.' 'The remaining post-mortem photographs may be admitted.']