R v Brian Spillane (No 2) [2016] NSWDC 333
Tendency evidence was admitted because the alleged pattern of behaviour, although involving some differences, was similar enough and established tendencies relevant to the charges; this evidence was found to have significant probative value and its value substantially outweighed any prejudicial effect. Consequently, there was no basis for ordering separate trials.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 21 September 2016
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal / Pre Trial Ruling on Tendency Evidence and Severance (separate Trials) Applications
- Outcome
- Tendency evidence admitted. Application for separate trials refused.
- Legal Topics
- ['tendency Evidence' 'separate Trials' 'probative Value' 'sexual Offences' 'admissibility of Evidence']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Pre Trial Ruling on Tendency Evidence and Severance (separate Trials) Applications
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether tendency evidence should be admitted for all counts involving multiple complainants' 'Whether the trials should be held separately due to lack of similarities in alleged behaviours']
Ratio Decidendi
Tendency evidence was admitted because the alleged pattern of behaviour, although involving some differences, was similar enough and established tendencies relevant to the charges; this evidence was found to have significant probative value and its value substantially outweighed any prejudicial effect. Consequently, there was no basis for ordering separate trials.
Court Disposition
Tendency evidence admitted. Application for separate trials refused.
Orders
- ['The evidence of each complainant as regards the material which forms the basis of the various counts in the indictment and the evidence of the admissions made by the accused will be admitted as tendency evidence for the purposes of the allegations involving all complainants on the indictment.' 'The application for...
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment