R v James Duncan SMITH [2009] NSWDC 411

R v James Duncan SMITH [2009] NSWDC 411

Because the jury requested a transcript of the complainant's recorded police interview, and because balance and fairness required that the jury not consider the complainant's evidence-in-chief without the related challenges to that evidence, the appropriate response was to provide the transcript of the police interview together with the transcript of the complainant's evidence-in-chief, cross-examination and re-examination from the previous trial.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 May 2009
Procedural Posture
Criminal Trial / Ruling on Jury Note Requesting Transcript During Trial
Outcome
The judge decided to provide the jury with the requested transcript and additional transcript of the complainant's prior evidence.
Legal Topics
['jury Request for Transcript' 'child Complainant Evidence' 'pre Recorded Interview Evidence' 'retrial Evidence' 'balance and Fairness in Providing Transcripts to Jury']
['criminal Law' 'evidence' 'criminal Procedure'] ['jury Request for Transcript' 'child Complainant Evidence' 'pre Recorded Interview Evidence' 'retrial Evidence' 'balance and Fairness in Providing Transcripts to Jury']

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 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Criminal Trial / Ruling on Jury Note Requesting Transcript During Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["How the court should respond to a jury request for a transcript of the complainant's recorded police interview." 'Whether, in providing a transcript of evidence-in-chief given by recording, balance and fairness require provision of related cross-examination and re-examination transcript.']

Ratio Decidendi

Because the jury requested a transcript of the complainant's recorded police interview, and because balance and fairness required that the jury not consider the complainant's evidence-in-chief without the related challenges to that evidence, the appropriate response was to provide the transcript of the police interview together with the transcript of the complainant's evidence-in-chief, cross-examination and re-examination from the previous trial.

Court Disposition

The judge decided to provide the jury with the requested transcript and additional transcript of the complainant's prior evidence.

Orders

  • ["Provide the jury with a transcript of the complainant's record of interview with police." "Provide the jury with a transcript of the complainant's evidence-in-chief, cross-examination and re-examination given at the previous trial."]