R v Adrian PRESLAND [2009] NSWDC 71

R v Adrian PRESLAND [2009] NSWDC 71

The application for a verdict by direction was declined because there is evidence, though potentially weak, which can be taken into account by the jury and is capable of supporting a verdict; the matter must be left to the jury for its ultimate decision and it cannot be said there is no evidence upon which a properly directed jury could convict.

Parties
Prosecution: Regina; Accused: Adrian Presland
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 March 2009
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Application for Verdict by Direction (no Case to Answer)
Outcome
application for verdict by direction declined
Legal Topics
Manslaughter, Criminal Negligence, Verdict by Direction

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 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Prosecution

Adrian Presland

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Application for Verdict by Direction (no Case to Answer)

  1. 1 Whether the Crown case is capable of establishing the essential ingredients of manslaughter by criminal negligence against the accused
  2. 2 Whether there is evidence upon which a reasonable jury could find the accused guilty
  3. 3 Foreseeability of risk of death or serious harm by a reasonable person in the accused's position

Ratio Decidendi

The application for a verdict by direction was declined because there is evidence, though potentially weak, which can be taken into account by the jury and is capable of supporting a verdict; the matter must be left to the jury for its ultimate decision and it cannot be said there is no evidence upon which a properly directed jury could convict.

Court Disposition

application for verdict by direction declined

Orders

  • application for acquittal dismissed; trial to proceed for jury determination