R v B.G. [2008] NSWDC 229
The evidence of tendency and coincidence, as identified and delimited, had significant probative value and was substantially and relevantly similar. No reasonable possibility of concoction or contamination was made out. The probative value significantly outweighed any prejudicial effect. Certain evidence was excluded as unfairly prejudicial.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 27 August 2008
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal / Voir Dire Ruling on Admissibility of Evidence
- Outcome
- Part tendency and all coincidence evidence admitted; some evidence excluded
- Legal Topics
- ['admissibility of Evidence' 'tendency Evidence' 'coincidence Evidence' 'similar Fact Evidence']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Voir Dire Ruling on Admissibility of Evidence
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether tendency and coincidence evidence ought to be admitted' 'Whether evidence should be excluded for possibility of concoction or prejudice']
Ratio Decidendi
The evidence of tendency and coincidence, as identified and delimited, had significant probative value and was substantially and relevantly similar. No reasonable possibility of concoction or contamination was made out. The probative value significantly outweighed any prejudicial effect. Certain evidence was excluded as unfairly prejudicial.
Court Disposition
Part tendency and all coincidence evidence admitted; some evidence excluded
Orders
- ['The coincidence evidence as set out in paragraph 18 is admitted.' 'The tendency evidence as set out in paragraph 25, save for (c), is admitted.' 'The evidence identified to counsel on pages 4 and 5 of Exhibit 3 is excluded.']
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