SUPREME COURT OF VICTORIA
COURT OF APPEAL
S EAPCR 2021 0079
| GIOVANNI POLIMENI | Applicant |
| v | |
| THE QUEEN | Respondent |
---
JUDICIAL REGISTRAR: | McCANN JR |
WHERE HELD: | Melbourne |
DATE OF HEARING: | 28 October 2021 |
DATE OF JUDGMENT: | 1 December 2021 |
| MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION: | [2021] VSCA 329 |
---
CRIMINAL LAW – Appeal – Practice and procedure – Production of documents – Applicant seeks documents from Chief Commissioner of Victoria Police – Whether legitimate forensic purpose – Application refused – Criminal Procedure Act 2009, s 317.
---
APPEARANCES: | Counsel | Solicitors |
| For the Applicant | Mr J Barreiro | Condello Lawyers |
| For the Respondent | Ms C Fitzgerald | Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions |
| For the Chief Commissioner of Victoria Police | Ms S Maharaj QC with Mr J Bayly | Victorian Government Solicitor’s Office |
McCANN JR:
Introduction
On 22 March 2013, following a trial, the applicant, Giovanni Polimeni, was convicted of conspiracy to possess a commercial quantity of cocaine. On 15 April 2013, he was sentenced to 18 years’ imprisonment with a non-parole period of
12 years.
His applications for leave to appeal against conviction and sentence were refused by the Court of Appeal on 16 April 2014.[1]
The conduct of Victoria Police in the use of legal practitioners — former barrister Nicola Gobbo (‘Ms Gobbo’) and now-deceased solicitor Joseph Acquaro (‘Mr Acquaro’) — as police informants has been revealed over the course of a number of reported decisions of this Court and the High Court.[2] Additionally, it is detailed in the Final Report of the Royal Commission into the Management of Police Informants (‘RCMPI’), established to inquire into, inter alia, ‘the number of, and extent to which, cases may have been affected by the conduct of Ms Gobbo as a human source.’[3]
[2]AB v CD & EF [2019] VSCA 28; AB v CD; EF v CD [2018] HCA 58; Orman v The Queen [2019] VSCA 163; Madafferi v The Queen [2021] VSCA 1.
[3]Royal Commission into the Management of Police Informants (Final Report, 30 November 2020) Final Report Summary, The Commission’s Terms of Reference 1, 7.
The RCMPI Final Report refers to a sequence of criminal conspiracies and the associated investigations by Victoria Police, the Australian Federal Police (‘AFP’) and Australian Border Force (‘ABF’) into the ‘Tomato Tins’ drug syndicate cases. The cases share some participants in common and are linked through what is said to be causal motivation, in that the later conspiracies are said to have been motivated by the need to recoup losses caused by the interception of the original shipment of ecstasy concealed in tomato tins in a container aboard the MV Monica. The cases are linked also by the evidentiary trail followed by investigators. The conspiracy to ship cocaine for which the applicant was convicted was prompted by the interception of the tomato tins shipment and was detected by investigators as a consequence of that interception.
On 23 June 2021, the applicant applied for leave to appeal…
Continue reading Polimeni v The Queen
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Polimeni v The Queen [2021] VSCA 329
- Case
- [2021] VSCA 329
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary issue before the court was the interpretation and application of section 317 of the Criminal Procedure Act 2009. Specifically, the court had to decide whether Polimeni's application sufficiently demonstrated that the documents he sought were required for a legitimate forensic purpose. The court also had to consider the scope of the term "legitimate forensic purpose" and whether the documents Polimeni sought fell within this scope. Furthermore, the court needed to assess whether the application process and the justifications provided by Polimeni met the statutory requirements.
The court held that the term "legitimate forensic purpose" required more than a general assertion that the documents were necessary for the applicant's case. The court found that Polimeni had not provided specific details about how the documents would assist in his forensic analysis or the investigation. The court concluded that Polimeni's application lacked the necessary specificity and did not demonstrate a legitimate forensic purpose as required by the statute. Consequently, the court upheld the decision of the single judge to refuse the application. The appeal was dismissed, and the orders of the trial judge were affirmed.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.