R v Ronald Edward Medich (No. 22) [2017] NSWSC 248

R v Ronald Edward Medich (No. 22) [2017] NSWSC 248

Even accepting that the relationship between Gattellari and the accused was a fact in issue, the relevant passage was no more than an expression of the accused's opinion about who may or may not have been responsible for the deceased's murder, and that opinion was completely irrelevant to any issue in the trial. The rest of the conversation was still more remote, being merely discussion of a newspaper article and opinions about responsibility for the deceased's death, matters for the jury. The evidence was therefore excluded as irrelevant.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
14 March 2017
Procedural Posture
Criminal Proceeding / Procedural Evidentiary Ruling on the Accused's Tender of a Recorded Conversation During the Defence Case
Outcome
The evidence was excluded.
Legal Topics
['relevance' 'admissibility of Recorded Conversation' "evidence of Accused's Opinion About Responsibility for Murder" 'discretionary Exclusion Under S 135(b) of the Evidence Act 1995 (nsw)']
['criminal Law' 'evidence'] ['relevance' 'admissibility of Recorded Conversation' "evidence of Accused's Opinion About Responsibility for Murder" 'discretionary Exclusion Under S 135(b) of the Evidence Act 1995 (nsw)']

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 Proceeding / Procedural Evidentiary Ruling on the Accused's Tender of a Recorded Conversation During the Defence Case

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether a recorded conversation between the accused and his son about a newspaper article concerning the deceased's murder was relevant evidence." 'Whether the conversation could rationally affect the assessment of the probability of a fact in issue, including the relationship between the accused and Gattellari.' 'If relevant, whether the evidence should be excluded under s. 135(b) of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW).']

Ratio Decidendi

Even accepting that the relationship between Gattellari and the accused was a fact in issue, the relevant passage was no more than an expression of the accused's opinion about who may or may not have been responsible for the deceased's murder, and that opinion was completely irrelevant to any issue in the trial. The rest of the conversation was still more remote, being merely discussion of a newspaper article and opinions about responsibility for the deceased's death, matters for the jury. The evidence was therefore excluded as irrelevant.

Court Disposition

The evidence was excluded.

Orders

  • ['The recorded conversation between the accused and his son was excluded.']