R v Abdollahi (No 2) [2013] NSWSC 475

R v Abdollahi (No 2) [2013] NSWSC 475

The footage taken around 11.47 to 11.48pm was relevant because fires well alight within the Fowler Compound within about half an hour of staff evacuation and the detainees' buoyant or boisterous behaviour could bear on whether the common purpose alleged by the Crown existed before and around the time of evacuation. In the context of other evidence of fires, defiance and threatened violence, the footage did not create unfair prejudice warranting exclusion.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 February 2013
Procedural Posture
Criminal Proceedings for Riot and Affray / Procedural Ruling on Admissibility of Evidence
Outcome
Evidence admissible
Legal Topics
['riot' 'affray' 'common Purpose' 'relevance' 'unfair Prejudice' 'admissibility of Video Footage']
['criminal Law' 'evidence'] ['riot' 'affray' 'common Purpose' 'relevance' 'unfair Prejudice' 'admissibility of Video Footage']

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 Proceedings for Riot and Affray / Procedural Ruling on Admissibility of Evidence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether video footage recorded after the staff evacuation from the Fowler Compound was relevant to the alleged common purpose for the riot count.' 'Whether the probative value of the footage was outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice.']

Ratio Decidendi

The footage taken around 11.47 to 11.48pm was relevant because fires well alight within the Fowler Compound within about half an hour of staff evacuation and the detainees' buoyant or boisterous behaviour could bear on whether the common purpose alleged by the Crown existed before and around the time of evacuation. In the context of other evidence of fires, defiance and threatened violence, the footage did not create unfair prejudice warranting exclusion.

Court Disposition

Evidence admissible

Orders

  • ['What was described as chapter one of the Polair footage is admissible.']