R v HG; R v WE (No 5) [2018] NSWSC 1212
The material found on electronic devices connected with the accused was relevant and highly probative of intention and ideology despite the absence of evidence that WE had read or viewed it, and its probative value was clearly high with no relevant danger of misuse or unfair prejudice under s 137 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW).
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 03 August 2018
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Proceeding Involving Charges of Doing Acts in Preparation for a Terrorist Act or Acts / Procedural and Other Ruling on Admissibility of Evidence
- Outcome
- Evidence admitted
- Legal Topics
- ['relevance' 'probative Value' 'unfair Prejudice' 'terrorism Related Material' 'electronic Devices']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Criminal Proceeding Involving Charges of Doing Acts in Preparation for a Terrorist Act or Acts / Procedural and Other Ruling on Admissibility of Evidence
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether magazines found on electronic devices linked to the accused were relevant where there was no evidence that the accused had read or viewed them.' 'Whether the magazines and footage should be excluded under s 137 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) because their probative value was outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice.']
Ratio Decidendi
The material found on electronic devices connected with the accused was relevant and highly probative of intention and ideology despite the absence of evidence that WE had read or viewed it, and its probative value was clearly high with no relevant danger of misuse or unfair prejudice under s 137 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW).
Court Disposition
Evidence admitted
Orders
- ['The evidence should be 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