Easwaralingam v DPP & Anor [2010] VSCA 353: the requirements of hearsay notices

While we were away the accused in DPP v Sajanesh Easwaralingam & Anor [2010] VSC 437 (a successful prosecution appeal) took the decision of Pagone J to the Court of Appeal in Easwaralingam v DPP & Anor [2010] VSCA 353.We discussed the Supreme Court case here last year. The appeal involved argument about the meaning …

Continue reading Easwaralingam v DPP & Anor [2010] VSCA 353: the requirements of hearsay notices

Easwaralingam v DPP & Anor [2010] VSCA 353: the requirements of hearsay notices

While we were away the accused in DPP v Sajanesh Easwaralingam & Anor [2010] VSC 437 (a successful prosecution appeal) took the decision of Pagone J to the Court of Appeal in Easwaralingam v DPP & Anor [2010] VSCA 353.We discussed the Supreme Court case here last year. The appeal involved argument about the meaning …

Continue reading Easwaralingam v DPP & Anor [2010] VSCA 353: the requirements of hearsay notices

Legislation Watch: Sentencing Further Amendment Bill 2010

The new state government introduced legislation during the final sitting of Parliament last year to satisfy some pre-election commitments. The three bills introduced were,Education and Training Reform Amendment (School Safety) Bill 2010 (Explanatory Memorandum here, Statement of Compatibility here, Second Reading speech here.)Police Regulation Amendment (Protective Services Officers) Bill 2010. (Explanatory Memorandum here, Statement of …

Continue reading Legislation Watch: Sentencing Further Amendment Bill 2010

BP v R; R v BP [2010] NSWCCA 303: tendency or coincidence evidence?

Have difficulty telling the difference between tendency and coincidence evidence?You're not alone. The last time I wrote a paper on tendency and coincidence evidence (when it was still known as similar fact and propensity) it took me so long that by the time I had finished it the law had changed again. With that experience …

Continue reading BP v R; R v BP [2010] NSWCCA 303: tendency or coincidence evidence?

R v Tran [2010] VSC 560: positive identification

R v Tran [2010] VSC 560 is a decision of Hollingworth J presiding over a murder trial. The judgment concerns the admissibility of the selection of the accused's picture from an array of photographs shown to an eyewitness.Pitkin v R (1995) 80 A Crim R 302 is often quoted as authority for the proposition (amongst …

Continue reading R v Tran [2010] VSC 560: positive identification