Regina v L Cassar; Regina v E Sleiman; Regina v H Kalache (Judgment No 12) [1999] NSWSC 352

Regina v L Cassar; Regina v E Sleiman; Regina v H Kalache (Judgment No 12) [1999] NSWSC 352

Statements made by Adam Stacey to Sgt Buckley are admissible as prior consistent statements under Evidence Act 1995 s 108(3), given the attack on Stacey's credibility and allegations of fabrication, and as explanation for delay under s 108(1); leave is granted under s 192, as the evidence is important, not unduly lengthening the hearing, nor unfair.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
15 April 1999
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Interlocutory Ruling on Admissibility of Evidence
Outcome
Evidence allowed
Legal Topics
['admissibility of Prior Consistent Statements' 'credibility of Witnesses' 'delay in Reporting' 'application of Evidence Act 1995 S 108(1), S 108(3)']
['criminal Law' 'evidence'] ['admissibility of Prior Consistent Statements' 'credibility of Witnesses' 'delay in Reporting' 'application of Evidence Act 1995 S 108(1), S 108(3)']

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 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Interlocutory Ruling on Admissibility of Evidence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether statements made by eyewitness Mr Stacey to Sgt Buckley are admissible as prior consistent statements under Evidence Act 1995 s 108(1) and (3)' 'Whether those statements rebut suggestions of fabrication and explain delay in reporting' 'Whether leave should be granted pursuant to Evidence Act 1995 s 192']

Ratio Decidendi

Statements made by Adam Stacey to Sgt Buckley are admissible as prior consistent statements under Evidence Act 1995 s 108(3), given the attack on Stacey's credibility and allegations of fabrication, and as explanation for delay under s 108(1); leave is granted under s 192, as the evidence is important, not unduly lengthening the hearing, nor unfair.

Court Disposition

Evidence allowed

Orders

  • ["Material in Sgt Buckley's statement may be adduced in evidence"]