R v Geeves; R v Geeves [2024] NSWSC 815
The Judge found the evidence about the 1997/1998 pregnancy and termination to be relevant to whether Amber Haigh would have voluntarily left her baby, as it shows she made considered decisions regarding pregnancy and motherhood in the past. The evidence’s probative value is not outweighed by unfair prejudice and does not trigger exclusion under s 135 or s 137 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW). Therefore, the evidence is admissible.
- Parties
- Prosecutor: Rex (Crown); Accused: Robert Samuel Geeves; Accused: Anne Margaret Geeves
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 02 July 2024
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal / Interlocutory Ruling in Murder Trial
- Outcome
- evidence allowed
- Legal Topics
- Adducing Evidence, Relevance, Exclusion of Evidence, Murder
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Rex (Crown)
Prosecutor
Robert Samuel Geeves
Accused
Anne Margaret Geeves
Accused
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Interlocutory Ruling in Murder Trial
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether evidence of the 1997/1998 pregnancy and early 1998 termination of pregnancy is relevant and admissible in the murder trial of Amber Haigh
- 2 Whether such evidence should be excluded under s 135 or s 137 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) for unfair prejudice
Ratio Decidendi
The Judge found the evidence about the 1997/1998 pregnancy and termination to be relevant to whether Amber Haigh would have voluntarily left her baby, as it shows she made considered decisions regarding pregnancy and motherhood in the past. The evidence’s probative value is not outweighed by unfair prejudice and does not trigger exclusion under s 135 or s 137 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW). Therefore, the evidence is admissible.
Court Disposition
evidence allowed
Orders
- The evidence regarding Amber Haigh's 1997/1998 pregnancy and early 1998 termination of pregnancy is admissible.
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