R v Abdollahi (No 11) [2013] NSWSC 484

R v Abdollahi (No 11) [2013] NSWSC 484

Self-defence would not be left to the jury because the evidence did not leave open any reasonable possibility that Mr Ali believed it was necessary to act in defence of himself or in defence of property, or that his conduct was a reasonable response. There was no evidence that detainees were physically attacking or threatening other detainees, and no basis to infer that Mr Ali was motivated to protect government property by threatening violence to those causing damage.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 April 2013
Procedural Posture
Criminal Prosecution for Riot And, in the Alternative, Affray / Procedural Ruling on Whether Self Defence Should Be Left to the Jury
Outcome
Leave to rely on self-defence was declined in relation to the accused Haider Hussein Ali.
Legal Topics
['self Defence' 'defences' 'jury Directions' 'riot' 'affray']
['criminal Law'] ['self Defence' 'defences' 'jury Directions' 'riot' 'affray']

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 Prosecution for Riot And, in the Alternative, Affray / Procedural Ruling on Whether Self Defence Should Be Left to the Jury

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether there was an evidentiary foundation for self-defence to be left to the jury in relation to the accused Haider Hussein Ali.' 'Whether the evidence was capable of establishing a reasonable possibility that Mr Ali believed on reasonable grounds that his conduct was necessary in defence of himself or in defence of property, and that his conduct was a reasonable response in the circumstances as he perceived them.']

Ratio Decidendi

Self-defence would not be left to the jury because the evidence did not leave open any reasonable possibility that Mr Ali believed it was necessary to act in defence of himself or in defence of property, or that his conduct was a reasonable response. There was no evidence that detainees were physically attacking or threatening other detainees, and no basis to infer that Mr Ali was motivated to protect government property by threatening violence to those causing damage.

Court Disposition

Leave to rely on self-defence was declined in relation to the accused Haider Hussein Ali.

Orders

  • ['Decline to leave self-defence to the jury in relation to the accused Haider Hussein Ali.']