Director of Public Prosecutions v Bandali Michael Debs and Jason Joseph Roberts

[2002] VSC 510

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF VICTORIA Not Restricted

AT MELBOURNE

CRIMINAL DIVISION

No. 1527 of 2001

Director of Public Prosecutions

v

Bandali Michael Debs and Jason Joseph Roberts

Ruling No. 23

JUDGE:	Cummins J
WHERE HELD:	Melbourne
DATE OF RULING:	19 November 2002
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	DPP v Bandali Michael Debs and Jason Joseph Roberts
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2002] VSC 510

---

Criminal law and procedure – murder – expert evidence – legal professional privilege.

---

APPEARANCES:	Counsel	Solicitors
For the Director	Mr J.W. Rapke QC with Mr P.B. Kidd and Mr J.J. Serong	OPP
For the accused Debs	Mr P.C. Dane QC with Mr G. Georgiou	Victoria Legal Aid
For the accused Roberts	Mr I.D. Hill QC with Ms S.K. Dawes	Lethbridges

HIS HONOUR:

1. Mr Rapke should not ask the witness the contents of any communication made by him to the legal practitioners of Mr Debs because that material is privileged.  Mr Rapke, unsurprisingly, has stated he does not intend to do so and had no intention of doing so because he is sensitive to that privilege.  Accordingly, he should continue as he intended, that is by not asking about the contents of any communication between the Professor and the representatives legally for Mr Debs.

1. Next, Mr Rapke should not, and he understandably does not intend to do so, ask the witness about the contents of any CD which has been ruled inadmissible by reason of irrelevance or prejudice, including post-criminality or other criminality which has been excluded in ruling No. 5.

1. Other than that I consider Mr Rapke is entitled to ask the questions he has foreshadowed he wishes to ask of the Professor.  That is because there is an issue as to the Professor's expertise in relation to the evidence he has given of these five CDs and the material Mr Rapke seeks to traverse and explore is relevant to that issue.

1. Subsequently it may be necessary for me to give the jury directions to avoid any prejudice to Mr Debs as to how the jury can properly use the material on the trial of Mr Debs, but that is a matter for later judicial direction.

1. Accordingly, Mr Rapke may ask the questions that he has foreshadowed he wishes to ask with the caveats I have stated and which, as I say, he had already proposed to do.

---