R v J Lucas; R v B Lucas (No 7) [2022] NSWSC 1814
The expert evidence concerning extreme right-wing ideology, organisation, and symbols is relevant and sufficiently connected to the issues for trial, in particular the allegation of preparation for acts of politically motivated violence, and is therefore admissible. The witnesses are qualified, and their evidence meets both the relevance and expert opinion provisions in the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW).
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 01 March 2022
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal / Pre Trial Evidentiary Ruling on Admissibility of Expert Evidence
- Outcome
- Expert evidence is admissible
- Legal Topics
- ['admissibility of Expert Evidence' 'right Wing Extremism' 'relevance of Expert Testimony' 'evidence Act 1995 (nsw)']
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 Evidentiary Ruling on Admissibility of Expert Evidence
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether expert evidence about extreme right-wing ideology, symbols, and organisations is admissible' 'Whether such evidence is relevant to the issues to be determined by the jury' 'Whether the expert evidence goes beyond what is necessary or is cloaked with undue authority']
Ratio Decidendi
The expert evidence concerning extreme right-wing ideology, organisation, and symbols is relevant and sufficiently connected to the issues for trial, in particular the allegation of preparation for acts of politically motivated violence, and is therefore admissible. The witnesses are qualified, and their evidence meets both the relevance and expert opinion provisions in the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW).
Court Disposition
Expert evidence is admissible
Orders
- ['The expert evidence of Dr Campion and Ms Mendelson is admissible']
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