R v Fantakis [2018] NSWSC 1815

R v Fantakis [2018] NSWSC 1815

The accused’s admissions, though made in circumstances where mental illness was present, are not excluded under s 90 or s 137 of the Evidence Act 1900 (NSW). The unfairness or potential unreliability arising from the accused’s mental state is best addressed by the jury, which will have the benefit of expert and other evidence, rather than by excluding the evidence outright. Proper directions to the jury can mitigate any prejudice, and the probative value of the admissions is substantial in the context of the Crown’s circumstantial case. Accordingly, the application to exclude the admissions is refused.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
26 February 2018
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Application to Exclude Evidence (voir Dire) Pre Trial
Outcome
Application to exclude evidence refused
Legal Topics
['admissibility of Admissions' 'evidence Obtained From Accused' 'mental Illness and Reliability of Confessions' 'unfair Prejudice' 's 90 Evidence Act' 's 137 Evidence Act']
['criminal Law'] ['admissibility of Admissions' 'evidence Obtained From Accused' 'mental Illness and Reliability of Confessions' 'unfair Prejudice' 's 90 Evidence Act' 's 137 Evidence Act']

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 / Application to Exclude Evidence (voir Dire) Pre Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether admissions made by the accused in diary notes and video recordings should be excluded on the grounds of unreliability due to mental illness under s 90 or s 137 of the Evidence Act 1900 (NSW)' 'Whether the probative value of the admissions is outweighed by their potential for unfair prejudice']

Ratio Decidendi

The accused’s admissions, though made in circumstances where mental illness was present, are not excluded under s 90 or s 137 of the Evidence Act 1900 (NSW). The unfairness or potential unreliability arising from the accused’s mental state is best addressed by the jury, which will have the benefit of expert and other evidence, rather than by excluding the evidence outright. Proper directions to the jury can mitigate any prejudice, and the probative value of the admissions is substantial in the context of the Crown’s circumstantial case. Accordingly, the application to exclude the admissions is refused.

Court Disposition

Application to exclude evidence refused

Orders

  • ['The application to exclude evidence of admissions is refused.']