R v Peterson (No. 3) [2014] NSWSC 1063

R v Peterson (No. 3) [2014] NSWSC 1063

The evidence of Miss Wilson was rejected so far as it was tendered as tendency evidence because notice was not properly given, the evidence was too general in parts to be relevant to the issue of tendency, and its probative value did not substantially outweigh any prejudicial effect. However, part of her evidence regarding a specific incident was admitted as relationship evidence relevant to the accused's behaviour when intoxicated, but limited in use under s 136 of the Evidence Act. The evidence of Miss Miller was admitted as it was relevant, had probative value, and any possible prejudice did not outweigh that value.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
25 July 2014
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Interlocutory Application – Admissibility Ruling on Evidence
Outcome
Evidence of Miss Wilson rejected as tendency evidence, but admitted for limited relationship/context purpose; Evidence of Miss Miller admitted.
Legal Topics
['tendency Evidence' 'admissibility of Evidence' 'notice Requirement' 'probative Value' 'prejudicial Effect']
['evidence' 'criminal Law'] ['tendency Evidence' 'admissibility of Evidence' 'notice Requirement' 'probative Value' 'prejudicial Effect']

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 / Interlocutory Application – Admissibility Ruling on Evidence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the evidence of Miss Wilson should be admitted as tendency evidence under s 97 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW)' 'Whether notice requirement in relation to tendency evidence can be dispensed with under s 100 of the Evidence Act' 'Whether probative value of the evidence substantially outweighs any prejudicial effect on the accused' 'Whether Miss Miller’s evidence is admissible']

Ratio Decidendi

The evidence of Miss Wilson was rejected so far as it was tendered as tendency evidence because notice was not properly given, the evidence was too general in parts to be relevant to the issue of tendency, and its probative value did not substantially outweigh any prejudicial effect. However, part of her evidence regarding a specific incident was admitted as relationship evidence relevant to the accused's behaviour when intoxicated, but limited in use under s 136 of the Evidence Act. The evidence of Miss Miller was admitted as it was relevant, had probative value, and any possible prejudice did not outweigh that value.

Court Disposition

Evidence of Miss Wilson rejected as tendency evidence, but admitted for limited relationship/context purpose; Evidence of Miss Miller admitted.

Orders

  • ['I will reject the evidence of Miss Wilson so far as it is tendered as tendency evidence.' 'I will admit that evidence for that purpose, limiting its use to that purpose alone, in accordance with the provisions of s 136 of the Evidence Act.' "My ruling in respect of Miss Miller's evidence is that her evidence at...