R v D [2011] NSWDC 73
Given the accused's age (14), absence of a support person, previous exercise of right to silence, and the special relationship with the teacher, it would be unfair to use either set of admissions made to the teacher in evidence; both are excluded under s 90 Evidence Act 1995.
- Parties
- Prosecutor: Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions; Accused: D
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 31 May 2011
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal / Pre Trial Ruling (admissibility of Evidence)
- Outcome
- Admissions excluded (evidence ruled inadmissible)
- Legal Topics
- Admissibility of Admissions, Unfairness Discretion, Children in Criminal Proceedings, Support Persons for Children, Relationship of Trust (teacher/student)
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions
Prosecutor
D
Accused
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Pre Trial Ruling (admissibility of Evidence)
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether admissions made by a 14-year-old accused to his teacher are admissible under s 90 of the Evidence Act 1995 given circumstances including a lack of support person and the relationship between teacher and student
Ratio Decidendi
Given the accused's age (14), absence of a support person, previous exercise of right to silence, and the special relationship with the teacher, it would be unfair to use either set of admissions made to the teacher in evidence; both are excluded under s 90 Evidence Act 1995.
Court Disposition
Admissions excluded (evidence ruled inadmissible)
Orders
- The admissions made by the accused to the teacher on 17 November 2010 are excluded from evidence.
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