Director of Public Prosecutions v Thomas

[2006] VSC 252

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF VICTORIA Not Restricted

AT MELBOURNE

CRIMINAL DIVISION

No. 1458 of 2004

DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS (Commonwealth)

v

JOSEPH TERRENCE THOMAS

RULING NO. 11

---

JUDGE:	CUMMINS J
WHERE HELD:	Melbourne
DATE OF HEARING:	20 February 2006
DATE OF RULING:	20 February 2006
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	DPP v Thomas
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2006] VSC 252

---

Criminal law and procedure – terrorism offences – Commonwealth Criminal Code s.102.6(1) and s.102.7(1) – Passports Act 1938 s.9A(1)(e) – passport – best evidence.

---

APPEARANCES:	Counsel	Solicitors
For the Director	Mr N. T. Robinson with Ms L. Taylor	Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions
For the Accused	Mr L. Lasry QC with Mr M. Taft	Robert Stary and Associates
For the Commonwealth Attorney-General (by leave)	Mr R.Tracey QC with Dr S. Donaghue	Australian Government Solicitor

HIS HONOUR:

1. I consider that the best evidence ought to be placed before the jury.  The count, relevantly being count four, is of falsification of a passport and I consider in that circumstance that the passport itself, being the best evidence, ought be tendered.  The resolution of any possible prejudice to Mr Thomas is important.  I would have thought it could be done either of two ways, either the other pages be properly sealed off, not half open so that you can look inside them, or else a neutral formula be stated from the Bar table by agreement such as the one I have suggested in discussion, or both.

1. After all the count only relates to the matters in count four that are specified on the face of the presentment and it is no problem to say to the jury that other travel by Mr Thomas is irrelevant to this case and was simply for ordinary tourist purposes and he is entitled to the privacy of those matters.  So I am quite sure that an appropriate formula can be reached for the jury, either leaving the pages open with the formula, or having them sealed off with the formula.  The essential thing to avoid prejudice is to say to the jury in clear and undisputed terms that the other travel was ordinary travel.

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