R v Hawi & ors (No 1) [2011] NSWSC 1647

R v Hawi & ors (No 1) [2011] NSWSC 1647

The hierarchy evidence was relevant because the Crown alleged that the Comanchero accused acted as a group pursuant to a joint criminal enterprise, and evidence of the club's structure, offices, rules and obligations could rationally affect the jury's assessment of why members attended the airport, how they responded to fellow members and the president, and the existence and scope of any joint criminal enterprise. Except for evidence that nominee members were required to participate in criminal acts, and subject to further submissions about some rules suggesting unrelated criminal activity, the danger of unfair prejudice did not outweigh the probative value of the evidence.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
21 April 2011
Procedural Posture
Criminal Proceedings Evidentiary Ruling / Pre Trial Objection to Admissibility of Evidence on Voir Dire
Outcome
Evidence admitted in part
Legal Topics
['relevance' 'unfair Prejudice' 'joint Criminal Enterprise' 'murder' 'motorcycle Club Hierarchy Evidence']
['criminal Law' 'evidence'] ['relevance' 'unfair Prejudice' 'joint Criminal Enterprise' 'murder' 'motorcycle Club Hierarchy Evidence']

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 Evidentiary Ruling / Pre Trial Objection to Admissibility of Evidence on Voir Dire

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether evidence about the Comanchero motorcycle club's hierarchy, leadership roles, membership structure and rules was relevant to proof of the alleged joint criminal enterprise." 'Whether the probative value of the hierarchy evidence was outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice to the accused.' 'Whether particular evidence about nominee members being required to participate in criminal acts, and rules concerning police or mobile phones, should be admitted.']

Ratio Decidendi

The hierarchy evidence was relevant because the Crown alleged that the Comanchero accused acted as a group pursuant to a joint criminal enterprise, and evidence of the club's structure, offices, rules and obligations could rationally affect the jury's assessment of why members attended the airport, how they responded to fellow members and the president, and the existence and scope of any joint criminal enterprise. Except for evidence that nominee members were required to participate in criminal acts, and subject to further submissions about some rules suggesting unrelated criminal activity, the danger of unfair prejudice did not outweigh the probative value of the evidence.

Court Disposition

Evidence admitted in part

Orders

  • ["The evidence set out in the Crown's written outline document was held to be relevant." 'Evidence about nominee members being required to participate in criminal acts was not permitted to be led because the danger of unfair prejudice outweighed its probative value.' 'Further submissions would be heard about...