R v Medich (No 8) [2016] NSWSC 1713

R v Medich (No 8) [2016] NSWSC 1713

Mathieson's evidence, particularly the deceased's statement that he wanted to "burn" the accused, was admissible because the surrounding email correspondence and agreed facts made the representation highly probably reliable under s. 65(2)(c), and its high probative value concerning the deteriorating relationship between the accused and deceased was not outweighed by unfair prejudice. The deceased's wife's evidence about the deceased being uncomfortable with the accused as surety and about alleged fabrication of evidence was inadmissible or, if admissible, should be excluded because its probative value was slight and substantially outweighed by unfair prejudice. McClymont's evidence that...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
09 December 2016
Procedural Posture
Criminal Proceedings on Indictment for Murder and Intimidation / Pre Trial Evidentiary Ruling on Admissibility of Relationship Evidence
Outcome
Evidence admitted in part and excluded in part.
Legal Topics
['relationship Evidence' 'hearsay Exceptions' 'probative Value and Unfair Prejudice' 'evidence of Motive' 'contemporaneous Statements About State of Mind' 'representations of Deceased Persons']
['criminal Law' 'evidence'] ['relationship Evidence' 'hearsay Exceptions' 'probative Value and Unfair Prejudice' 'evidence of Motive' 'contemporaneous Statements About State of Mind' 'representations of Deceased Persons']

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 Proceedings on Indictment for Murder and Intimidation / Pre Trial Evidentiary Ruling on Admissibility of Relationship Evidence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether evidence from Paul Mathieson about statements made by the deceased concerning the accused was admissible as relationship evidence and under s. 65(2)(b) or (c) of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW).' "Whether evidence from the deceased's wife about the deceased's relationship with the accused, including bail surety matters and alleged fabrication of evidence, was admissible." 'Whether evidence from journalist Kathryn McClymont that the deceased said he was aware the accused planned to have him killed was admissible under s. 66A of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW).' "Whether evidence of the relationship between the accused and Fortunato Gattellari, including surveillance of the accused's wife, share transfers, a power of attorney and debt collection, should be admitted or excluded under s. 137 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW)."]

Ratio Decidendi

Mathieson's evidence, particularly the deceased's statement that he wanted to "burn" the accused, was admissible because the surrounding email correspondence and agreed facts made the representation highly probably reliable under s. 65(2)(c), and its high probative value concerning the deteriorating relationship between the accused and deceased was not outweighed by unfair prejudice. The deceased's wife's evidence about the deceased being uncomfortable with the accused as surety and about alleged fabrication of evidence was inadmissible or, if admissible, should be excluded because its probative value was slight and substantially outweighed by unfair prejudice. McClymont's evidence that...

Court Disposition

Evidence admitted in part and excluded in part.

Orders

  • ['The evidence of Mathieson identified by reference to paragraph 24 of his statement was admitted, with other parts of his proposed evidence to be revisited if necessary during the Crown case.' "The evidence of the deceased's wife concerning the accused acting as surety and the deceased's belief that the accused...