R v Phanekham (No 2) [2013] NSWSC 1738

R v Phanekham (No 2) [2013] NSWSC 1738

Evidence of participation in a violent video game, without more, is not probative of the accused's state of mind at the time of the alleged offence and is thus inadmissible. There is considerable risk the jury would misuse this evidence, warranting exclusion even if it were technically relevant.

Parties
Prosecutor: Crown; Accused: Viengsavanh Phanekham
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
26 November 2013
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Evidentiary Ruling During Trial
Outcome
Evidence rejected
Legal Topics
Admissibility of Evidence, Prejudicial Vs Probative Value, State of Mind, Video Game Evidence
Evidence Criminal Law Admissibility of Evidence Prejudicial Vs Probative Value State of Mind Video Game Evidence

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 2 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Crown

Prosecutor

Viengsavanh Phanekham

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Evidentiary Ruling During Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether evidence of the accused playing a violent computer game before the confrontation is admissible
  2. 2 Whether the evidence is probative of the accused's state of mind
  3. 3 Whether the probative value of the evidence is outweighed by its prejudicial effect

Ratio Decidendi

Evidence of participation in a violent video game, without more, is not probative of the accused's state of mind at the time of the alleged offence and is thus inadmissible. There is considerable risk the jury would misuse this evidence, warranting exclusion even if it were technically relevant.

Court Disposition

Evidence rejected

Orders

  • The proffered evidence regarding the nature of the video game played by the accused is not admitted.