R v Ian DACEY; R v Lee DACEY (No 3) [2013] NSWSC 1877

Procedural Posture

Criminal Procedure Ruling in a Murder Trial / Ruling on Proposed Jury Directions During Trial

Legal Issues

1. 1 ["Whether the jury should be directed that Lee Dacey's liability as alleged non-actor principal depended upon or was derived from negativing self-defence with regard to Ian Dacey as alleged actor principal." 'Whether, for extended joint criminal enterprise, Lee Dacey needed to foresee the possible use of a knife or similar weapon by Ian Dacey.' 'Whether murder by joint criminal enterprise requires a non-actor principal to participate in a physical sense in the events causing death.' 'How Lee Dacey should be described to the jury given the distinction between an actor principal and a non-actor principal in the first degree.']

Ratio Decidendi

The proposed directions sought for Lee Dacey were rejected because they would be contrary to the cited High Court and New South Wales authorities on joint criminal enterprise and extended joint criminal enterprise, and the evidence in the trial did not alter the elements of murder by joint criminal enterprise.

Court Disposition

Application for the proposed directions rejected.

Orders

• ['The jury will not be directed that the liability of Lee Dacey is dependent upon or derived from negativing self-defence with regard to Ian Dacey.' 'The jury will not be directed that, for extended joint criminal enterprise, Lee Dacey needed to foresee the possible use of a knife or similar weapon by Ian Dacey.'...