R v Warwick (No.83) [2019] NSWSC 1757

R v Warwick (No.83) [2019] NSWSC 1757

The report was not relevant because it addressed the Accused's current mental and cognitive condition as at March 2016 and did not permit an inference about his skills or capacity in the first half of the 1980s, including planning, organisation, or bomb construction. The Accused's cooperation with the assessment, obtained in the context of a bail application, did not support an inference of innocence. Accordingly, the report could not rationally affect the assessment of the probability of any fact in issue.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
04 December 2019
Procedural Posture
Common Law Criminal / Procedural Ruling on Tender of Expert Report During the Calling of Witnesses by the Accused in Answer to the Crown Case
Outcome
Tender rejected.
Legal Topics
['relevance' 'expert Evidence' 'admissibility of Expert Report' 'section 55 of the Evidence Act 1995']
['criminal Law' 'evidence'] ['relevance' 'expert Evidence' 'admissibility of Expert Report' 'section 55 of the Evidence Act 1995']

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 Tender of Expert Report During the Calling of Witnesses by the Accused in Answer to the Crown Case

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether Dr Susan Pulman's expert report dated 30 March 2016 was relevant to the Accused's skills and capacity in the first half of the 1980s to plan and organise the Events and construct bombs." "Whether the Accused's cooperation with Dr Pulman's assessment could support an inference consistent with innocence."]

Ratio Decidendi

The report was not relevant because it addressed the Accused's current mental and cognitive condition as at March 2016 and did not permit an inference about his skills or capacity in the first half of the 1980s, including planning, organisation, or bomb construction. The Accused's cooperation with the assessment, obtained in the context of a bail application, did not support an inference of innocence. Accordingly, the report could not rationally affect the assessment of the probability of any fact in issue.

Court Disposition

Tender rejected.

Orders

  • ['The tender of the report of Dr Pulman of 30 March 2016 marked as MFI E-T is rejected.']