R v Ye Zhang [2000] NSWSC 1099

R v Ye Zhang [2000] NSWSC 1099

The court substantially accepted the accused's account of the events preceding his confession. The police conduct, including presenting the accused with the alternatives of cooperating or being charged with murder, offering benefits and possible sentence consequences, threatening physical violence, and imposing a final opportunity to cooperate, was designed to and did oppress the accused. The Crown did not satisfy the court that the making of the admissions was not influenced by that oppressive conduct. Section 84 of the Evidence Act 1995 therefore required exclusion of the evidence of admissions. The court also would have exercised the s 90 discretion to exclude the evidence as unfair.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
01 December 2000
Procedural Posture
Criminal Voir Dire Concerning Evidence of Admissions in a Special Hearing on Two Counts of Murder / Admissibility Ruling Before Second Special Hearing
Outcome
Evidence of admissions excluded.
Legal Topics
['voir Dire' 'admissions' 'voluntariness' 'oppressive Police Conduct' 'reliability of Admissions' 'unfairness Discretion' 'improperly Obtained Evidence' 'unfitness to Be Tried' 'special Hearing']
['criminal Law' 'evidence' 'criminal Procedure' 'mental Health Criminal Procedure'] ['voir Dire' 'admissions' 'voluntariness' 'oppressive Police Conduct' 'reliability of Admissions' 'unfairness Discretion' 'improperly Obtained Evidence' 'unfitness to Be Tried' 'special Hearing']

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 Voir Dire Concerning Evidence of Admissions in a Special Hearing on Two Counts of Murder / Admissibility Ruling Before Second Special Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether evidence of admissions made by the accused should be excluded under s 84 of the Evidence Act 1995 because the admissions or their making were influenced by violent, oppressive, inhuman or degrading conduct or a threat of such conduct.' 'Whether the circumstances in which the admissions were made made it unlikely that the truth of the admissions was adversely affected for the purposes of s 85 of the Evidence Act 1995.' 'Whether it would be unfair to the accused to use the evidence of the admissions for the purposes of s 90 of the Evidence Act 1995.' 'Whether the admissions were obtained improperly or in contravention of an Australian law, including s 424A of the Crimes Act, so as to engage s 138 of the Evidence Act 1995.']

Ratio Decidendi

The court substantially accepted the accused's account of the events preceding his confession. The police conduct, including presenting the accused with the alternatives of cooperating or being charged with murder, offering benefits and possible sentence consequences, threatening physical violence, and imposing a final opportunity to cooperate, was designed to and did oppress the accused. The Crown did not satisfy the court that the making of the admissions was not influenced by that oppressive conduct. Section 84 of the Evidence Act 1995 therefore required exclusion of the evidence of admissions. The court also would have exercised the s 90 discretion to exclude the evidence as unfair.

Court Disposition

Evidence of admissions excluded.

Orders

  • ['Evidence of admissions excluded.']