R v HG; R v WE (No 3) [2018] NSWSC 1210

R v HG; R v WE (No 3) [2018] NSWSC 1210

The evidence formed part of the Crown's circumstantial case as to the accused's intention and ideology and, when assessed with the other evidence relied upon by the Crown, was relevant and had significant probative value. That probative value was not outweighed by any danger of unfair prejudice because there was no identified danger that the jury would misuse the evidence in the manner contemplated by s 137.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
03 August 2018
Procedural Posture
Criminal Proceeding / Procedural and Other Ruling on Admissibility of Evidence on the Voir Dire
Outcome
Evidence admitted.
Legal Topics
['relevance' 'probative Value' 'unfair Prejudice' 'circumstantial Evidence' 'terrorism Offences']
['evidence' 'criminal Law'] ['relevance' 'probative Value' 'unfair Prejudice' 'circumstantial Evidence' 'terrorism Offences']

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 and Other Ruling on Admissibility of Evidence on the Voir Dire

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether evidence that both accused refused to stand for the National Anthem at a school assembly was relevant to intention and ideology.' "Whether evidence of accused WE's subsequent school absences, many coinciding with days on which the National Anthem was to be played, was relevant to intention and ideology." 'Whether the evidence should be excluded under s 137 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) because its probative value was outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice.']

Ratio Decidendi

The evidence formed part of the Crown's circumstantial case as to the accused's intention and ideology and, when assessed with the other evidence relied upon by the Crown, was relevant and had significant probative value. That probative value was not outweighed by any danger of unfair prejudice because there was no identified danger that the jury would misuse the evidence in the manner contemplated by s 137.

Court Disposition

Evidence admitted.

Orders

  • ['The evidence will be admitted.']