Regina v Dean Anthony Privett and Michael Privett [1999] NSWSC 1074

Regina v Dean Anthony Privett and Michael Privett [1999] NSWSC 1074

The applicant failed to establish that a fair or unprejudiced trial could not be had at Goulburn as media coverage was restrained and any risk of prejudice could be addressed by jury directions. Regarding separate trials, the bulk of the evidence was common to both accused; the evidence admissible solely against Michael Privett was discrete and capable of being isolated by jury directions, and the case against Dean was not significantly weaker or different. No real risk of positive injustice in a joint trial was shown.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
03 August 1999
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Pre Trial, Applications for Change of Venue and Separate Trials
Outcome
Applications for change of venue and for separate trials refused.
Legal Topics
['change of Venue' 'separate Trials' 'joint Trials' 'prejudice From Publicity' 'co Offenders' 'jury Instructions']
['criminal Law'] ['change of Venue' 'separate Trials' 'joint Trials' 'prejudice From Publicity' 'co Offenders' 'jury Instructions']

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 / Pre Trial, Applications for Change of Venue and Separate Trials

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether a fair or unprejudiced trial cannot otherwise be had at Goulburn due to media publicity' 'Whether a joint trial of Dean Anthony Privett and Michael Privett would cause positive injustice warranting separate trials']

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to establish that a fair or unprejudiced trial could not be had at Goulburn as media coverage was restrained and any risk of prejudice could be addressed by jury directions. Regarding separate trials, the bulk of the evidence was common to both accused; the evidence admissible solely against Michael Privett was discrete and capable of being isolated by jury directions, and the case against Dean was not significantly weaker or different. No real risk of positive injustice in a joint trial was shown.

Court Disposition

Applications for change of venue and for separate trials refused.

Orders

  • ['Application for change of venue refused.' 'Application for separate trials refused.']