R v Krivosic (No. 3) [2021] NSWSC 1560

R v Krivosic (No. 3) [2021] NSWSC 1560

There were prior inconsistent statements by SJ, and in some respects, it was arguable that she was not making a genuine attempt to give evidence. Granting leave to the Crown to cross-examine under s.38 Evidence Act 1995 was appropriate to serve the interests of justice and to allow for the interests underlying s.38.

Parties
Crown: Regina; Accused: Marko Krivosic
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 November 2021
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Procedural Ruling During Murder Trial
Outcome
Application granted
Legal Topics
Section 38 Evidence Act 1995, Leave to Cross Examine Witness, Prior Inconsistent Statements, Murder Trial Procedure
Criminal Law Section 38 Evidence Act 1995 Leave to Cross Examine Witness Prior Inconsistent Statements Murder Trial Procedure

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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Crown

Marko Krivosic

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Procedural Ruling During Murder Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Crown should be granted leave under s.38 Evidence Act 1995 to cross-examine witness SJ on specified portions of her evidence from a previous trial

Ratio Decidendi

There were prior inconsistent statements by SJ, and in some respects, it was arguable that she was not making a genuine attempt to give evidence. Granting leave to the Crown to cross-examine under s.38 Evidence Act 1995 was appropriate to serve the interests of justice and to allow for the interests underlying s.38.

Court Disposition

Application granted

Orders

  • The Crown is granted leave under s.38 Evidence Act 1995 to cross-examine SJ on the specified parts of her evidence given at the first trial on 27 April 2021.