R v Briggs [2014] NSWSC 850

R v Briggs [2014] NSWSC 850

At the stage of applying s 137 of the Evidence Act, questions of credibility, reliability, and weight are not for the trial judge but for the jury; thus, cross-examination of witnesses relating to those issues is not permitted during the voir dire.

Parties
Prosecution: Regina; Accused: Cecil Paul Briggs
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
02 June 2014
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Interlocutory Application
Outcome
Objection dismissed; cross-examination of witnesses regarding weight of evidence not permitted.
Legal Topics
Voice Identification Evidence, Admissibility, Balancing Probative Value and Prejudice, Voir Dire, Cross Examination
Criminal Law Evidence Voice Identification Evidence Admissibility Balancing Probative Value and Prejudice Voir Dire Cross Examination

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 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Prosecution

Cecil Paul Briggs

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Interlocutory Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Admissibility of voice identification evidence from two witnesses
  2. 2 Application of s 137 Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) balancing test
  3. 3 Role of trial judge under s 137 regarding assessment of reliability and weight

Ratio Decidendi

At the stage of applying s 137 of the Evidence Act, questions of credibility, reliability, and weight are not for the trial judge but for the jury; thus, cross-examination of witnesses relating to those issues is not permitted during the voir dire.

Court Disposition

Objection dismissed; cross-examination of witnesses regarding weight of evidence not permitted.

Orders

  • Cross-examination of the two witnesses will not be permitted.