R v Dent [2016] NSWSC 99

R v Dent [2016] NSWSC 99

The proposed evidence that Mr Dent murdered two men in 1977 did not have significant probative value as tendency or coincidence evidence. Although there were some similarities between the 1977 and 2014 incidents, the Crown relied on a single prior occasion occurring 37 years earlier, when the accused was 17, and there was no suggested similar violent conduct in the intervening period. That lapse diluted the probative force to the point where significant probative value was not established, and any probative value did not outweigh the potential prejudice of the jury learning that the accused had killed before.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
04 February 2016
Procedural Posture
Criminal Proceeding; Ruling on Admissibility of Tendency and Coincidence Evidence / Objection by the Accused to the Crown's Proposal to Adduce Tendency and Coincidence Evidence
Outcome
Evidence inadmissible
Legal Topics
['tendency Evidence' 'coincidence Evidence' 'significant Probative Value' 'prejudicial Effect' 'murder' 'robbery in Company Inflicting Grievous Bodily Harm']
['criminal Law' 'evidence'] ['tendency Evidence' 'coincidence Evidence' 'significant Probative Value' 'prejudicial Effect' 'murder' 'robbery in Company Inflicting Grievous Bodily Harm']

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 Proceeding; Ruling on Admissibility of Tendency and Coincidence Evidence / Objection by the Accused to the Crown's Proposal to Adduce Tendency and Coincidence Evidence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether evidence that the accused murdered two men in 1977 was admissible as tendency evidence under s 97 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW).' 'Whether evidence that the accused murdered two men in 1977 was admissible as coincidence evidence under s 98 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW).' 'Whether the probative value of the proposed prosecution tendency or coincidence evidence substantially outweighed any prejudicial effect under s 101 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW).']

Ratio Decidendi

The proposed evidence that Mr Dent murdered two men in 1977 did not have significant probative value as tendency or coincidence evidence. Although there were some similarities between the 1977 and 2014 incidents, the Crown relied on a single prior occasion occurring 37 years earlier, when the accused was 17, and there was no suggested similar violent conduct in the intervening period. That lapse diluted the probative force to the point where significant probative value was not established, and any probative value did not outweigh the potential prejudice of the jury learning that the accused had killed before.

Court Disposition

Evidence inadmissible

Orders

  • ['The evidence of Mr Dent having murdered two men in 1977 was excluded.']