Slater v R [2015] NSWCCA 310

Slater v R [2015] NSWCCA 310

The convictions could not stand because the Crown case depended on flawed CCTV and still images that did not permit proof beyond reasonable doubt that the Appellant was an offender on Counts 2 and 3, and because on Counts 4 to 8 there was no evidence linking the use of the stolen credit card to the times when the...

Source-derived case information.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
08 December 2015
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal Against Convictions / Appeal to the Court of Criminal Appeal From Convictions and Sentences After a District Court Jury Trial
Outcome
Leave granted to the extent required; appeal against conviction on Counts 2 to 8 allowed; convictions and sentences quashed; verdicts of acquittal entered.
Legal Topics
['unreasonable Verdict' 'cctv Identification Evidence' 'jury Directions' 'reasons for Evidentiary Rulings' 'property Offences' 'no Case to Answer']
['criminal Law' 'criminal Procedure' 'evidence'] ['unreasonable Verdict' 'cctv Identification Evidence' 'jury Directions' 'reasons for Evidentiary Rulings' 'property Offences' 'no Case to Answer']

Source-derived case record

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 Appeal Against Convictions / Appeal to the Court of Criminal Appeal From Convictions and Sentences After a District Court Jury Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the guilty verdicts on Counts 2 and 3 were unreasonable and could not be supported by the evidence having regard to the flawed CCTV and still photographic evidence.' 'Whether the guilty verdicts on Counts 4 to 8 were unreasonable or unsupported where there was no evidence linking use of the stolen credit card to the times depicted in CCTV footage.' 'Whether the trial Judge erred by failing to give reasons for admitting CCTV footage and photographs.' 'Whether the jury was wrongly directed to compare CCTV and photographs only with arrest photographs and not with the Appellant as observed in court.']

Ratio Decidendi

The convictions could not stand because the Crown case depended on flawed CCTV and still images that did not permit proof beyond reasonable doubt that the Appellant was an offender on Counts 2 and 3, and because on Counts 4 to 8 there was no evidence linking the use of the stolen credit card to the times when the person alleged to be the Appellant appeared in the CCTV footage. The guilty verdicts were unreasonable and could not be supported by the evidence, requiring the convictions and sentences to be quashed and verdicts of acquittal entered.

Court Disposition

Leave granted to the extent required; appeal against conviction on Counts 2 to 8 allowed; convictions and sentences quashed; verdicts of acquittal entered.

Orders

  • ['To the extent it is required, leave is granted to appeal against conviction.' 'The appeal against conviction on Counts 2 to 8 is allowed.' 'The convictions and sentences on Counts 2 to 8 are quashed.' 'Verdicts of acquittal are entered on each of Counts 2 to 8.']