R v Rogers (No 3) [2018] NSWSC 1218

R v Rogers (No 3) [2018] NSWSC 1218

Because the note could only be dated to 27 April 2016 or earlier, with no clarity as to when it was written, and was a domestic note written some five months before the charged crime with a tone difficult to discern, it could not rationally affect the assessment of the probability of a fact in issue and was excluded for lack of relevance.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 August 2018
Procedural Posture
Common Law Criminal / Procedural Ruling on Admissibility of Tendered Evidence
Outcome
Tender rejected.
Legal Topics
['relevance' 'admissibility of Handwritten Note' 'state of Mind' 'character Evidence']
['criminal Law' 'evidence'] ['relevance' 'admissibility of Handwritten Note' 'state of Mind' 'character 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

Common Law Criminal / Procedural Ruling on Admissibility of Tendered Evidence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether a handwritten note written by the accused to the deceased was relevant to the accused's state of mind contemporaneously to the death of the deceased." 'Whether the tender should be rejected for lack of relevance given uncertainty as to when the note was written.']

Ratio Decidendi

Because the note could only be dated to 27 April 2016 or earlier, with no clarity as to when it was written, and was a domestic note written some five months before the charged crime with a tone difficult to discern, it could not rationally affect the assessment of the probability of a fact in issue and was excluded for lack of relevance.

Court Disposition

Tender rejected.

Orders

  • ['The tender is rejected.']