R v Xie (No 23) [2016] NSWSC 1924

R v Xie (No 23) [2016] NSWSC 1924

The evidence regarding the accused’s statements about 'face' and his relationship with family meets the minimum requirements for admission, given the assumption that the jury will accept it. The question of admitting evidence regarding the broader Chinese cultural concept of 'face', based on lay opinions, is reserved pending further consideration, especially if expert evidence is later provided.

Parties
Prosecution: The Crown; Accused: Lian Bin (Robert) Xie
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 June 2016
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Pre Trial Ruling
Outcome
determination reserved
Legal Topics
Evidence, Motive, Admissibility

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 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Crown

Prosecution

Lian Bin (Robert) Xie

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Pre Trial Ruling

  1. 1 whether evidence regarding motive and Chinese cultural concept of 'face' is admissible
  2. 2 whether evidence invites unfair prejudice or propensity reasoning

Ratio Decidendi

The evidence regarding the accused’s statements about 'face' and his relationship with family meets the minimum requirements for admission, given the assumption that the jury will accept it. The question of admitting evidence regarding the broader Chinese cultural concept of 'face', based on lay opinions, is reserved pending further consideration, especially if expert evidence is later provided.

Court Disposition

determination reserved

Orders

  • Ultimate determination on admissibility of evidence regarding cultural concept of 'face' reserved; parties to reflect and Crown to consider whether to rely on existing lay evidence or present expert evidence.
  • No objection taken to use of interactive 3D model of crime scene; model allowed.