R v Spiteri-Ahern; R v Barber; R v Zraika (No 9) [2017] NSWSC 1331

R v Spiteri-Ahern; R v Barber; R v Zraika (No 9) [2017] NSWSC 1331

On the basis advanced by the Crown, the transcript did not presently support the inference sought because the relevant concerns expressed by Ms Spiteri-Ahern in June or July 2013 pre-dated the 26 September 2013 cross-examination, and there was no evidence that the fear confirmed in the 21 November 2013 telephone conversation related to how the Local Court case had progressed on 26 September 2013. However, the transcript might potentially be relevant to motive on a different basis, so the Court adjourned consideration until counsel could be fully heard and marked the transcript for identification.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
28 September 2017
Procedural Posture
Criminal Proceedings; Procedural Ruling on Evidence / Crown Application to Tender Transcript of Campbelltown Local Court Proceedings; Consideration Adjourned Pending Further Submissions
Outcome
Consideration adjourned; transcript marked for identification pending further hearing.
Legal Topics
['relevance' 'drawing Inferences' 'motive' 'transcript of Domestic Violence Proceedings' 'tender of Evidence']
['evidence' 'criminal Law'] ['relevance' 'drawing Inferences' 'motive' 'transcript of Domestic Violence Proceedings' 'tender of 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; Procedural Ruling on Evidence / Crown Application to Tender Transcript of Campbelltown Local Court Proceedings; Consideration Adjourned Pending Further Submissions

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the transcript of Campbelltown Local Court proceedings was relevant and admissible to show that Ms Spiteri-Ahern's expressed concern or fear was rationally based and significant." 'Whether the transcript could support an inference of motive for the offence in question.' 'Whether further submissions were required before determining the tender.']

Ratio Decidendi

On the basis advanced by the Crown, the transcript did not presently support the inference sought because the relevant concerns expressed by Ms Spiteri-Ahern in June or July 2013 pre-dated the 26 September 2013 cross-examination, and there was no evidence that the fear confirmed in the 21 November 2013 telephone conversation related to how the Local Court case had progressed on 26 September 2013. However, the transcript might potentially be relevant to motive on a different basis, so the Court adjourned consideration until counsel could be fully heard and marked the transcript for identification.

Court Disposition

Consideration adjourned; transcript marked for identification pending further hearing.

Orders

  • ['Consideration adjourned until the Court hears fully from Counsel.' 'Pending that hearing, the document is marked for identification.']