R. v. Michael Anthony Ryan (No. 5) [2012] NSWSC 1159

R. v. Michael Anthony Ryan (No. 5) [2012] NSWSC 1159

It was not necessary to discharge the jury because, though there was some difficulty for jurors in viewing the CCTV footage clearly due to distance, after viewing the footage at close range all jurors indicated they did not feel at a disadvantage in following the evidence. There was no evidence of unfairness of trial or prejudice and the fairness criterion was not infringed.

Parties
Crown: Regina; Defendant: Michael Anthony Ryan
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 September 2012
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Interlocutory Application During Trial
Outcome
Application to discharge the jury is refused
Legal Topics
Discharge of Jury, Jury Directions, Admissibility of Evidence, Fair Trial
Criminal Law Discharge of Jury Jury Directions Admissibility of Evidence Fair Trial

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 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Crown

Michael Anthony Ryan

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Interlocutory Application During Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the jury should be discharged due to possible inability to see video evidence clearly in the courtroom
  2. 2 Whether accused could have a fair trial given the circumstances of presenting CCTV evidence

Ratio Decidendi

It was not necessary to discharge the jury because, though there was some difficulty for jurors in viewing the CCTV footage clearly due to distance, after viewing the footage at close range all jurors indicated they did not feel at a disadvantage in following the evidence. There was no evidence of unfairness of trial or prejudice and the fairness criterion was not infringed.

Court Disposition

Application to discharge the jury is refused

Orders

  • The application to discharge the jury is refused