R v LN; R v AW (No. 11) [2017] NSWSC 1430

R v LN; R v AW (No. 11) [2017] NSWSC 1430

Further directions of the type sought by counsel for the accused were not legally required in the circumstances as sufficient and proper directions had already been given to the jury on all material topics, and additional or differently worded directions were not necessary either as a matter of law or in light of the evidence and submissions. Directions given were appropriate to ensure the jury would limit consideration of the evidence as required by law, properly apply the onus and standard of proof, and separately consider each accused on admissible evidence relevant to them.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 October 2017
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Post Jury Summing Up, Applications for Further Jury Directions, Reasons for Ruling on Those Applications
Outcome
Further jury directions sought by the accused were refused or not given in the terms requested; appropriate alternate further directions were given where considered necessary.
Legal Topics
['murder' 'jury Directions' 'admissions' 'onus of Proof' 'joint Criminal Enterprise' 'expert Evidence' 'use of Evidence' 'separate Cases in Joint Trial']
['criminal Law'] ['murder' 'jury Directions' 'admissions' 'onus of Proof' 'joint Criminal Enterprise' 'expert Evidence' 'use of Evidence' 'separate Cases in Joint 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 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Post Jury Summing Up, Applications for Further Jury Directions, Reasons for Ruling on Those Applications

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether further jury directions were required on admissions made by LN' 'Whether further direction was required on onus of proof in circumstantial evidence' 'Whether direction was required on separate consideration of cases involving LN and AW' 'Whether further direction was required on use of evidence of assaults and child abuse committed by AW' 'Appropriate directions regarding expert evidence and onus of proof' 'Need for further summary of medical and lay evidence for the jury']

Ratio Decidendi

Further directions of the type sought by counsel for the accused were not legally required in the circumstances as sufficient and proper directions had already been given to the jury on all material topics, and additional or differently worded directions were not necessary either as a matter of law or in light of the evidence and submissions. Directions given were appropriate to ensure the jury would limit consideration of the evidence as required by law, properly apply the onus and standard of proof, and separately consider each accused on admissible evidence relevant to them.

Court Disposition

Further jury directions sought by the accused were refused or not given in the terms requested; appropriate alternate further directions were given where considered necessary.

Orders

  • ['Applications for further directions by LN and AW refused or not granted in the terms sought.' 'Further directions provided to the jury on select issues (onus of proof in circumstantial evidence, use of evidence, expert evidence) as determined appropriate by the Court.' 'Jury returned verdicts of guilty of murder...