Regina v HAWAT [2004] NSWCCA 393

Regina v HAWAT [2004] NSWCCA 393

The appeal was dismissed because the trial judge did not miscarry his discretion in refusing to discharge the jury, leave under r 4 was refused for the unpreserved complaint about directions on inconsistencies and hearsay, any alleged identification-direction grounds did not justify leave, and the verdicts were open to the jury on the evidence despite inconsistencies among witnesses.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
08 December 2004
Procedural Posture
Criminal Conviction Appeal / Appeal to the New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal From Convictions After District Court Jury Trial
Outcome
Appeal against conviction dismissed
Legal Topics
['sexual Intercourse Without Consent' 'discharge of Jury for Prejudicial Media Publicity' 'inconsistencies in Witness Evidence' 'hearsay Evidence' 'identification Evidence Warnings' 'miscarriage of Justice and Unsafe Verdict']
['criminal Law' 'evidence' 'criminal Procedure'] ['sexual Intercourse Without Consent' 'discharge of Jury for Prejudicial Media Publicity' 'inconsistencies in Witness Evidence' 'hearsay Evidence' 'identification Evidence Warnings' 'miscarriage of Justice and Unsafe Verdict']

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 Conviction Appeal / Appeal to the New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal From Convictions After District Court Jury Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the trial judge erred by failing to discharge the jury after allegedly prejudicial media publicity concerning a person named Ahmed Hawat was published during the trial.' "Whether the trial judge failed adequately to direct the jury about inconsistencies between the complainant's evidence and the evidence of Andrea and Alison." 'Whether the trial judge erred in comments or directions about prior statements admitted into evidence and hearsay evidence.' 'Whether warnings or directions under s 116 of the Evidence Act were required concerning alleged identification evidence of the complainant, Alison and Andrea.' 'Whether the guilty verdicts constituted a miscarriage of justice because the jury ought to have entertained a reasonable doubt.']

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed because the trial judge did not miscarry his discretion in refusing to discharge the jury, leave under r 4 was refused for the unpreserved complaint about directions on inconsistencies and hearsay, any alleged identification-direction grounds did not justify leave, and the verdicts were open to the jury on the evidence despite inconsistencies among witnesses.

Court Disposition

Appeal against conviction dismissed

Orders

  • ['Appeal against conviction dismissed']