R v Bidner (No 2) [2023] NSWSC 943

R v Bidner (No 2) [2023] NSWSC 943

The Court held that the statements purportedly made by Ms Walker Bietmann to others constitute hearsay upon hearsay, and without a formal or recorded statement by Ms Walker Bietmann herself, such evidence is inadmissible under s 65(2) of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW). Accordingly, the Court excluded the statements from evidence.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
28 February 2023
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Procedural Ruling on Admissibility of Evidence
Outcome
Evidence excluded
Legal Topics
['hearsay Evidence' 's 65(2) Evidence Act' 'admission of Prior Statements' 'hearsay Upon Hearsay']
['criminal Law' 'evidence'] ['hearsay Evidence' 's 65(2) Evidence Act' 'admission of Prior Statements' 'hearsay Upon Hearsay']

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 / Procedural Ruling on Admissibility of Evidence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether statements allegedly made by Ms Imogen Walker Bietmann to three witnesses are admissible under s 65(2) of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) as exceptions to the hearsay rule' "Whether 'hearsay upon hearsay' is admissible under s 65(2) Evidence Act 1995 (NSW)"]

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that the statements purportedly made by Ms Walker Bietmann to others constitute hearsay upon hearsay, and without a formal or recorded statement by Ms Walker Bietmann herself, such evidence is inadmissible under s 65(2) of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW). Accordingly, the Court excluded the statements from evidence.

Court Disposition

Evidence excluded

Orders

  • ['Exclude the evidence of statements made by Ms Imogen Walker Bietmann to Ms Lee-Alice Mears, Detective Senior Constable Cooper or Senior Constable Smithers.']