R v Hunter (No 7) [2014] NSWSC 1150

R v Hunter (No 7) [2014] NSWSC 1150

Simply informing the accused of arrest, offence, and right to silence does not constitute an 'investigative procedure' for the purposes of the relevant statutes and regulations. Therefore, police complied with all statutory and regulatory requirements at the material times, and the contested evidence is admissible.

Parties
Prosecutor: Regina; Accused: Paul Andrew Hunter
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
10 July 2014
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Interlocutory Application
Outcome
Evidence not excluded
Legal Topics
Evidence, Admissibility, Improperly Obtained Evidence, Vulnerable Person, Compliance With Police Procedure

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 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Prosecutor

Paul Andrew Hunter

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Interlocutory Application

  1. 1 Whether evidence obtained from conversations between accused and police on 21 June 2011 and 20 October 2011 should be excluded under s 138 Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) due to alleged non-compliance with Law Enforcement (Powers and Responsibilities) Act 2002 and Regulation 2005
  2. 2 Whether requirements for caution, summary of rights, presence of support person, and legal representation for Aboriginal persons were complied with

Ratio Decidendi

Simply informing the accused of arrest, offence, and right to silence does not constitute an 'investigative procedure' for the purposes of the relevant statutes and regulations. Therefore, police complied with all statutory and regulatory requirements at the material times, and the contested evidence is admissible.

Court Disposition

Evidence not excluded

Orders

  • I do not exclude the evidence of the exchange of 21 June 2011 or the evidence of the exchange of 20 October 2011.