R v Al Batat & Ors (No 14) [2020] NSWSC 1165
The listening device evidence is inadmissible because the probative value is substantially diminished by uncertainties and inconsistencies in the translation, and is outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice and the risk of misleading or confusing the jury. Therefore, exclusion is mandated under s 137 and, in the alternative, s 135 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW).
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 31 August 2020
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal / Pre Trial Ruling on Admissibility of Evidence
- Outcome
- listening device evidence excluded as inadmissible
- Legal Topics
- ['admissibility of Evidence' 'translation Discrepancies' 'unfair Prejudice' 'probative Value' 'listening Device Evidence']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Pre Trial Ruling on Admissibility of Evidence
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether the recorded listening device evidence is admissible given translation discrepancies and potential unfair prejudice under s 135 and s 137 of Evidence Act 1995 (NSW)']
Ratio Decidendi
The listening device evidence is inadmissible because the probative value is substantially diminished by uncertainties and inconsistencies in the translation, and is outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice and the risk of misleading or confusing the jury. Therefore, exclusion is mandated under s 137 and, in the alternative, s 135 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW).
Court Disposition
listening device evidence excluded as inadmissible
Orders
- ['The listening device recorded on 4 May 2017 at 00:52:15 under warrant SD 17/0185 is inadmissible.']
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