Director of Public Prosecutions v Ho (Ruling No 11)

[2009] VSC 395

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF VICTORIA Not Restricted

CRIMINAL DIVISION

No. 1485 of 2006

DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS (COMMONWEALTH)

v

KAM TIN HO & ORS

---

JUDGE:	CUMMINS J
WHERE HELD:	Melbourne
DATE OF HEARING:	21 April 2009
DATE OF RULING:	21 April 2009
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	DPP v Ho & Ors (Ruling No 11)
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2009] VSC 395	Revised 19 October 2009

---

Criminal law and procedure – Trial – Slavery – Sex workers – Commonwealth Criminal Code – s 270.3(1)(a) and (c) – Financial Transactions Reports Act 1988 (Cth) s 31(1) – Prosecution opening – Documents for jury.

---

APPEARANCES:	Counsel	Solicitors
For the Director	Mr D Gurvich with Mr R Davis	Director of Public Prosecutions
For the Accused Kam Tim Ho	Mr J Dickinson SC	Theo Magazis & Associates
For the Accused Ho Kam Ho	Mr J Montgomery SC	Slades & Parsons
For the Accused Hoo	Mr J Bisas	Michael J Gleeson & Associates Pty Ltd
For the Accused Rahardjo	Mr L Hartnett	Robert Stary & Associates

-----------------

Ruling No.11

HIS HONOUR:

1. I consider all these documents are entitled to go to the jury in its Opening.  The ones I had given some specific thought to were Tab 5, the financial matters, and Tab 6, the travel movements, specifically to ensure that the accused are not prejudiced by the jury being hit with an avalanche of data which could be prejudicial.  In my view it will not be prejudicial.  Essentially it is a brief setting out of these items which the jury can then better follow in relation to the presentment and the dates; and as Mr Gurvich says, if the material is introduced piecemeal, I think it could cause confusion in the jury.  I think, accordingly, it is proper and not unfair to the accused to have this material in the Opening so the jury can have an overview of the case and not get lost in the detail.

1. I do not consider there is anything in the material which is of itself prejudicial to the accused being introduced at this stage, subject to proof, rather than being introduced piecemeal during the trial.  Accordingly, I rule that the jury book can go in its present six tab form.

---