R v Colless [2016] NSWSC 931
The evidence concerning the alleged harassment incidents before the fatal event, and the accused's response, was relevant to issues joined between the Crown and the accused. Any incompleteness in Mr Harris's account of what the accused said and did did not create sufficient prejudice to justify rejecting the evidence, and the parties could address the jury about any inferences available from that evidence.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 22 June 2016
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Law Evidence Ruling / Voir Dire Objection to Proposed Crown Witness Evidence
- Outcome
- The Court did not reject the evidence after it was clarified on the voir dire.
- Legal Topics
- ['relevance' 'hearsay or Direct Observation' 'unfair Prejudice' 'voir Dire']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Criminal Law Evidence Ruling / Voir Dire Objection to Proposed Crown Witness Evidence
Legal Issues
- 1 ["Whether the third sentence of paragraph 11 of Mr Max Harris's statement was based on direct observation or hearsay." 'Whether the evidence was relevant under s 55 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW).' 'Whether the evidence should be rejected because of prejudice to the accused under s 137 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW).']
Ratio Decidendi
The evidence concerning the alleged harassment incidents before the fatal event, and the accused's response, was relevant to issues joined between the Crown and the accused. Any incompleteness in Mr Harris's account of what the accused said and did did not create sufficient prejudice to justify rejecting the evidence, and the parties could address the jury about any inferences available from that evidence.
Court Disposition
The Court did not reject the evidence after it was clarified on the voir dire.
Orders
- ['The evidence was admitted.']
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment