R v Saurav MAHAY; Michael Dean KHAN, Dushand RANA [2010] NSWDC 342

R v Saurav MAHAY; Michael Dean KHAN, Dushand RANA [2010] NSWDC 342

The evidence of the witness about whether one of the voices on the intercept is that of Mr Rana would not assist the jury and is irrelevant, as it would not rationally affect the assessment of the probability that the voice is Mr Rana's.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 August 2010
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Jury Trial
Outcome
application rejected
Legal Topics
['voice Identification' 'relevance of Evidence' 'detain for Ransom']
['criminal Law'] ['voice Identification' 'relevance of Evidence' 'detain for Ransom']

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 / Jury Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether evidence from a witness regarding voice identification is relevant.' "Whether the witness's capacity to recognise a voice differs from the jury's capacity."]

Ratio Decidendi

The evidence of the witness about whether one of the voices on the intercept is that of Mr Rana would not assist the jury and is irrelevant, as it would not rationally affect the assessment of the probability that the voice is Mr Rana's.

Court Disposition

application rejected

Orders

  • ['I reject the questions.']