R v Tangi (No 5) [2020] NSWSC 540

R v Tangi (No 5) [2020] NSWSC 540

The probative value of the video evidence is significant and neither unfair prejudice nor risk of confusion justifies its exclusion under ss 135 or 137 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW).

Parties
Crown: Regina; Accused: Abraham Ryan Tangi
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
28 November 2019
Procedural Posture
Criminal Proceeding / Ruling on Objection to Evidence
Outcome
Objection to evidence rejected.
Legal Topics
Admissibility of Recorded Interview, S 135 Evidence Act, S 137 Evidence Act, Unavailable Witness, Probative Value Vs Unfair Prejudice
Evidence Criminal Law Admissibility of Recorded Interview S 135 Evidence Act S 137 Evidence Act Unavailable Witness Probative Value Vs Unfair Prejudice

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Crown

Abraham Ryan Tangi

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Proceeding / Ruling on Objection to Evidence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the electronically recorded interview of an unavailable witness should be excluded under s 135 or s 137 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) on the basis that it is incomprehensible, misleading or unfairly prejudicial.

Ratio Decidendi

The probative value of the video evidence is significant and neither unfair prejudice nor risk of confusion justifies its exclusion under ss 135 or 137 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW).

Court Disposition

Objection to evidence rejected.

Orders

  • The application that the evidence not be admissible is rejected.