R v LEH [2020] NSWCCA 135

The trial judge erred by diluting the probative value of admissions through consideration of exculpatory explanations and by weighing competing inferences contrary to established principles; the excluded evidence contained admissions relevant to presence and belief regarding consent, and its exclusion substantially weakened the prosecution's case.

Parties: Appellant: Regina; Respondent: LEH
Jurisdiction: Australia
Judgment Date: 23 June 2020
Procedural Posture: Criminal Appeal / Interlocutory Appeal Against Evidentiary Ruling
Outcome: Appeal allowed
Legal Topics: Admissibility of Evidence, Sexual Offences, Appeals, Accessory Liability

Criminal Law Admissibility of Evidence Sexual Offences Appeals Accessory Liability

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 3 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2

Parties

Regina

Appellant

LEH

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Interlocutory Appeal Against Evidentiary Ruling

Legal Issues

1 Whether the trial judge erred in excluding portions of a pretext call under s 137 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW)
2 Whether the excluded evidence substantially weakened the prosecution's case
3 Whether the evidence was admissible as an admission by the accused

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

Appeal allowed
Primary judge's ruling excluding the two disputed portions of the pretext call between the respondent and AD on 15 October 2015 from page 37 to page 38 and page 41 set aside