R v Pham; R v Nguyen; R v Trinh [2019] NSWSC 1539

R v Pham; R v Nguyen; R v Trinh [2019] NSWSC 1539

There is no evidence upon which a jury could properly convict Mr Pham of murder or manslaughter, as participation in a joint criminal enterprise to inflict harm or knowledge of violence/weapons cannot be rationally inferred; applications for Mr Trinh and Mr Nguyen are refused as circumstantial evidence is capable of supporting prosecution case and must be left for the jury to decide.

Parties
Prosecutor: Regina; Defendant: Jason Pham; Defendant: Voung Van Nguyen; Defendant: Minh Duc Trinh
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 November 2019
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Applications for Directed Verdicts at End of Prosecution Case
Outcome
Pham: directed verdict of not guilty; Nguyen and Trinh: application refused, matter to proceed to jury.
Legal Topics
Directed Verdict, Joint Criminal Enterprise, Circumstantial Evidence, Murder, Manslaughter
Criminal Law Directed Verdict Joint Criminal Enterprise Circumstantial Evidence Murder Manslaughter

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 5 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Prosecutor

Jason Pham

Defendant

Voung Van Nguyen

Defendant

Minh Duc Trinh

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Applications for Directed Verdicts at End of Prosecution Case

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there is evidence upon which a jury properly directed could convict the accused of murder
  2. 2 Whether the evidentiary threshold for a directed verdict of not guilty is met for Pham, Nguyen, and Trinh
  3. 3 Whether knowledge of presence/use of a knife can be properly inferred for each accused

Ratio Decidendi

There is no evidence upon which a jury could properly convict Mr Pham of murder or manslaughter, as participation in a joint criminal enterprise to inflict harm or knowledge of violence/weapons cannot be rationally inferred; applications for Mr Trinh and Mr Nguyen are refused as circumstantial evidence is capable of supporting prosecution case and must be left for the jury to decide.

Court Disposition

Pham: directed verdict of not guilty; Nguyen and Trinh: application refused, matter to proceed to jury.

Orders

  • The jury are directed to return a verdict of not guilty in the case of Mr Pham.
  • The application of Mr Nguyen for a verdict of not guilty by direction is refused.