R v Warwick (No.58) [2018] NSWSC 2016

R v Warwick (No.58) [2018] NSWSC 2016

The statement was admissible and Mr Reid could give evidence by reading or being led through it because the statement was made by a former police officer, signed when made, provided to the accused within a reasonable time, and, although prepared years after the murder investigation commenced, was made after reviewing his own notes and the police file for the Coronial Inquest and therefore was made at the time or soon after the relevant events in the required sense. Any prejudice was addressed by limiting specified third-party material under s 136 so that it was not evidence of the truth of its contents.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 November 2018
Procedural Posture
Criminal Proceeding Evidence Ruling / Crown Application Under S 33 of the Evidence Act 1995 for Mr Lyndon Russell Reid to Give Evidence in Chief by Reading or Being Led Through a Written Statement Made on 28 June 1982
Outcome
Specified material in Mr Lyndon Reid's statement of 28 June 1982 was admitted subject to a limitation on its use pursuant to s 136 of the Evidence Act 1995.
Legal Topics
['witness Evidence' 'refreshing Memory in Court' 'police Officer Statement' 'contemporaneity' 'limitation on Use of Evidence']
['evidence' 'criminal Law'] ['witness Evidence' 'refreshing Memory in Court' 'police Officer Statement' 'contemporaneity' 'limitation on Use of Evidence']

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 Evidence Ruling / Crown Application Under S 33 of the Evidence Act 1995 for Mr Lyndon Russell Reid to Give Evidence in Chief by Reading or Being Led Through a Written Statement Made on 28 June 1982

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether Mr Lyndon Russell Reid, a former police officer, should be permitted under s 33 of the Evidence Act 1995 to give evidence-in-chief by reading or being led through his 28 June 1982 statement.' 'Whether the statement was made at the time or soon after the occurrence of the events to which it refers for the purposes of s 33(2)(a) of the Evidence Act 1995.' 'Whether parts of the statement recounting information from third parties should be admitted subject to a limitation on use under s 136 of the Evidence Act 1995.']

Ratio Decidendi

The statement was admissible and Mr Reid could give evidence by reading or being led through it because the statement was made by a former police officer, signed when made, provided to the accused within a reasonable time, and, although prepared years after the murder investigation commenced, was made after reviewing his own notes and the police file for the Coronial Inquest and therefore was made at the time or soon after the relevant events in the required sense. Any prejudice was addressed by limiting specified third-party material under s 136 so that it was not evidence of the truth of its contents.

Court Disposition

Specified material in Mr Lyndon Reid's statement of 28 June 1982 was admitted subject to a limitation on its use pursuant to s 136 of the Evidence Act 1995.

Orders

  • ['Specified material in the statement of Mr Lyndon Reid of 28 June 1982 is to be admitted subject to limitation on its use pursuant to s 136 of the Evidence Act 1995, namely that it is not evidence of the truth of the contents of it.']