Mapham v Bannerman

Case

[2013] ACTSC 157

13 August 2013


Details
AGLC Case Decision Date
Mapham v Bannerman [2013] ACTSC 157 [2013] ACTSC 157 13 August 2013

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Vincent Mapham and Heather Mapham appealed against their convictions and sentences following their trial in the Magistrates' Court. Vincent was convicted of using false evidence, while Heather was convicted of being an accessory after the fact to that offence. The dispute centred on the admissibility of a receipt given by Vincent to an informant and the failure of the Magistrate to uphold a no case submission. The Full Court of the Supreme Court was required to determine whether the appeal should be allowed based on the grounds that the verdict was unsafe and unsatisfactory, or if the Magistrate had made an error that resulted in a substantial miscarriage of justice.

The court examined whether the Magistrate erred by applying Jones v Dunkel reasoning against Vincent, which held that a person in the company of an investigating officer should be cautioned to avoid impropriety in obtaining evidence. The court concluded that the reasoning was not applicable in this case as the evidence of the subsequent offence was not improperly obtained. Furthermore, the court found that the failure to caution did not render the evidence inadmissible. Additionally, the court considered whether the Magistrate erred in rejecting the no case submission. It held that although the evidence implicated Heather, it did not incriminate her to the extent that the Magistrate should have accepted the submission.

The appeal by Vincent was dismissed, and the Magistrate’s orders were confirmed. The court held that the Magistrate did not make an error that resulted in a substantial miscarriage of justice. Conversely, the appeal by Heather was upheld, her conviction and sentence were set aside, and a verdict of not guilty was entered. The court found that the evidence did not establish her guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

The court ordered that the appeal by Vincent Mapham is dismissed, and the Magistrate’s orders are confirmed. The appeal by Heather Mapham is upheld, her conviction and sentence are set aside, and a verdict of not guilty is entered.
Details

Areas of Law

  • Criminal Law

Legal Concepts

  • Appeal

  • Admissibility of Evidence

  • Use False Evidence

Actions
Download as PDF Download as Word Document


Cases Citing This Decision

10

Goodwin v Williams [2018] ACTSC 279
Glanville v Harris [2017] ACTSC 110
Lancaster v Hyde [2016] ACTSC 50
Cases Cited

30

Statutory Material Cited

1

R v Naa [2009] NSWSC 851
Dyers v The Queen [2002] HCA 45