R v Cranston (No 12) [2022] NSWSC 564

R v Cranston (No 12) [2022] NSWSC 564

It is appropriate to provide the jury with transcripts of the opening addresses, clearly marked 'submission, not evidence', in response to their request, with proper directions as to their use, particularly in a lengthy and complex trial.

Parties
Prosecutor: Regina (Crown); Accused: Adam Michael Cranston; Accused: Lauren Anne Cranston; Accused: Jason Cornell Onley; Accused: Dev Menon; Accused: Patrick Willmott
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 May 2022
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Procedural Ruling During Trial
Outcome
Jury's request for transcript granted
Legal Topics
Jury Access to Transcripts, Opening Addresses, Discretion to Provide Transcripts
Criminal Law Criminal Procedure Jury Access to Transcripts Opening Addresses Discretion to Provide Transcripts

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 4 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina (Crown)

Prosecutor

Adam Michael Cranston

Accused

Lauren Anne Cranston

Accused

Jason Cornell Onley

Accused

Dev Menon

Accused

Patrick Willmott

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Procedural Ruling During Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the jury should be provided with a copy of the transcript of the opening addresses

Ratio Decidendi

It is appropriate to provide the jury with transcripts of the opening addresses, clearly marked 'submission, not evidence', in response to their request, with proper directions as to their use, particularly in a lengthy and complex trial.

Court Disposition

Jury's request for transcript granted

Orders

  • The jury is to be provided with a copy of the transcripts of all opening addresses, marked 'submission, not evidence'