R v Xie (No 12) [2015] NSWSC 2124

R v Xie (No 12) [2015] NSWSC 2124

The evidence of the massage device and red rubber bands is admissible as coincidence evidence under s 98 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW). There is a sufficient evidentiary basis for the Crown's theory that similarities between the device and the items at the crime scene are not coincidental and are capable of supporting the inference that the accused committed the murders. The probative value substantially outweighs any prejudicial effect, and there is no actual prejudice arising from late notice that cannot be adequately addressed.

Parties
Prosecution: The Crown; Accused: Lian Bin (Robert) Xie
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
21 May 2015
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Admissibility Ruling During Trial
Outcome
Evidence admissible
Legal Topics
Admissibility of Coincidence Evidence, Reasonable Notice Under S 98 of Evidence Act, Prejudice and Probative Value Under S 101, Procedural Rulings
Criminal Law Evidence Admissibility of Coincidence Evidence Reasonable Notice Under S 98 of Evidence Act Prejudice and Probative Value Under S 101 Procedural Rulings

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 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Crown

Prosecution

Lian Bin (Robert) Xie

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Admissibility Ruling During Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether evidence of a massage device and red rubber bands found at the accused's home is admissible as coincidence evidence under s 98 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW)
  2. 2 Whether the Crown should be granted leave to adduce the evidence despite late notice under s 98(1)(a)
  3. 3 Whether the probative value of the evidence substantially outweighs any prejudicial effect under s 101

Ratio Decidendi

The evidence of the massage device and red rubber bands is admissible as coincidence evidence under s 98 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW). There is a sufficient evidentiary basis for the Crown's theory that similarities between the device and the items at the crime scene are not coincidental and are capable of supporting the inference that the accused committed the murders. The probative value substantially outweighs any prejudicial effect, and there is no actual prejudice arising from late notice that cannot be adequately addressed.

Court Disposition

Evidence admissible

Orders

  • The Crown is permitted to adduce the evidence of the massage device, red rubber bands, and related forensic testimony as coincidence evidence under s 98 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW).