R v MEHMET [2004] NSWCCA 24

R v MEHMET [2004] NSWCCA 24

The trial judge was correct to exclude the incomplete SMS text messages. They had no substantive probative value for attacking Vanessa Whalan's credibility on the alleged threat, minimal if any value on when she learned of the affair, and no sufficient value for discrediting Fred Horvat. Their use to infer the deceased's state of mind and likely words before the stabbing was highly speculative and did not meet the relevance threshold. They were also not admissible to support the appellant's credit because the Crown had not challenged his evidence about what Telstra told him. No error was shown in the sentencing remarks, and the sentence of 18 years with a non-parole period of 13.5 years...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 February 2004
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence From the Supreme Court
Outcome
Conviction appeal dismissed; leave to appeal against sentence granted; sentence appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['murder' 'provocation' 'sms Text Messages' 'admissibility' 'relevance' 'credibility Evidence' 'manifestly Excessive Sentence']
['criminal Law' 'evidence' 'sentencing'] ['murder' 'provocation' 'sms Text Messages' 'admissibility' 'relevance' 'credibility Evidence' 'manifestly Excessive Sentence']

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 Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence From the Supreme Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the trial judge erred in refusing to allow cross-examination of Vanessa Whalan and Fred Horvat about mobile phone SMS text messages allegedly received from the deceased and in refusing to admit the contents of those messages into evidence.' 'Whether the sentence of 18 years imprisonment with a non-parole period of 13.5 years for murder was manifestly excessive.']

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge was correct to exclude the incomplete SMS text messages. They had no substantive probative value for attacking Vanessa Whalan's credibility on the alleged threat, minimal if any value on when she learned of the affair, and no sufficient value for discrediting Fred Horvat. Their use to infer the deceased's state of mind and likely words before the stabbing was highly speculative and did not meet the relevance threshold. They were also not admissible to support the appellant's credit because the Crown had not challenged his evidence about what Telstra told him. No error was shown in the sentencing remarks, and the sentence of 18 years with a non-parole period of 13.5 years...

Court Disposition

Conviction appeal dismissed; leave to appeal against sentence granted; sentence appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • ['The conviction appeal be dismissed.' 'Leave to appeal against sentence be granted.' 'The sentence appeal be dismissed.']