RILEY v R [2011] NSWCCA 238

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

1. 1 ['Whether the verdict on count 1, felonious slaying of Shaun Bateson, was unreasonable and not supported by the evidence.' 'Whether the verdict on count 4, maliciously causing Brian Hadfield to take a poison, was unreasonable and not supported by the evidence.' 'Whether the verdict on count 7, maliciously causing Michael Wilson to take a poison, was unreasonable and not supported by the evidence.' 'Whether the trial judge erred in admitting particular tendency and coincidence evidence.' 'Whether the trial judge erred in directing the jury on what constituted causing a person to take a drug.' 'Whether the trial judge erred in directing the jury on manslaughter by criminal negligence.' 'Whether the trial judge erred in admitting Exhibit W, the "Dear Dr George" letter.']

Ratio Decidendi

The convictions on counts 1, 4 and 7 could not stand. For count 1, although the appellant supplied drugs to Shaun Bateson and the combination caused Bateson's death, the evidence did not prove beyond reasonable doubt that the drugs supplied by the appellant before the shopping centre meeting substantially contributed to death, given the opportunity for Bateson to access further tablets later and the expert evidence about the usual onset of Serotonin Syndrome. For counts 4 and 7, the evidence did not establish beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant caused Brian Hadfield or Michael Wilson to take the drugs in the legally required sense; making drugs available or influencing the...

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; convictions on counts 1, 4 and 7 quashed and verdicts of acquittal ordered.

Orders

• ['Appeal upheld.' 'Quash the conviction in relation to counts 1, 4 and 7 and order that verdicts of acquittal be entered with respect to those counts.']