R v Al Batat & Ors (No 28) [2020] NSWSC 1452
Ms Chan's voir dire evidence was fundamentally unfavourable to the prosecution case on motive, so it was appropriate to alter the order of examination under s 26 and grant leave under s 38 for the Prosecutor to cross-examine her generally. However, cross-examination about the knife threat, destruction of her phone and shooting of her Willoughby house would introduce a further shooting into the trial and create a real risk that the jury would speculate or infer that some accused were involved, causing prejudice and unfairness that outweighed any probative value on credit. Cross-examination about Ms Chan's knowledge of the murder of Qin Wu was admissible and could support the prosecution...
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 13 October 2020
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Law / Advance Ruling During Trial Under S 192 a of the Evidence Act 1995 (nsw) on Examination and Cross Examination of Witness Zi Yin (ada) Chan
- Outcome
- Advance ruling made partly in favour of the Prosecutor: order of cross-examination changed and s 38 leave granted, but cross-examination about the knife threat, phone destruction and Willoughby shooting disallowed; cross-examination about knowledge of Qin Wu's murder allowed.
- Legal Topics
- ['variation of Order of Examination and Cross Examination' 'cross Examination of Own Witness' 'unfavourable Witness' 'prejudicial Evidence' 'admissibility of Evidence' 'severed Count']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Criminal Law / Advance Ruling During Trial Under S 192 a of the Evidence Act 1995 (nsw) on Examination and Cross Examination of Witness Zi Yin (ada) Chan
Legal Issues
- 1 ["Whether the order of examination should be changed under s 26 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) to allow the Prosecutor to cross-examine Ms Chan after Mr Webb's examination." 'Whether leave should be granted under s 38 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) for the Prosecutor to cross-examine Ms Chan as an unfavourable witness, including on credibility.' 'Whether the Prosecutor should be permitted to cross-examine Ms Chan about a home invasion involving a knife threat, destruction of her phone, and the shooting of her house at Willoughby.' 'Whether the Prosecutor should be permitted to cross-examine Ms Chan about her knowledge of the murder of Qin Wu.']
Ratio Decidendi
Ms Chan's voir dire evidence was fundamentally unfavourable to the prosecution case on motive, so it was appropriate to alter the order of examination under s 26 and grant leave under s 38 for the Prosecutor to cross-examine her generally. However, cross-examination about the knife threat, destruction of her phone and shooting of her Willoughby house would introduce a further shooting into the trial and create a real risk that the jury would speculate or infer that some accused were involved, causing prejudice and unfairness that outweighed any probative value on credit. Cross-examination about Ms Chan's knowledge of the murder of Qin Wu was admissible and could support the prosecution...
Court Disposition
Advance ruling made partly in favour of the Prosecutor: order of cross-examination changed and s 38 leave granted, but cross-examination about the knife threat, phone destruction and Willoughby shooting disallowed; cross-examination about knowledge of Qin Wu's murder allowed.
Orders
- ["To allow the Prosecutor to cross-examine Ms Chan last, that is, after Mr Webb's examination, pursuant to s 26 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW)." 'To grant leave under s 38 of the Evidence Act to the Prosecutor to cross-examine the witness generally.' 'Cross-examination of Ms Chan about evidence of her being...
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment