R (Commonwealth) v Mark William Standen
[2011] NSWSC 1045
•02 June 2011
Supreme Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: R (Commonwealth) v Mark William Standen [2011] NSWSC 1045 Hearing dates: 2 June 2011 Decision date: 02 June 2011 Jurisdiction: Common Law - Criminal Before: James J Decision: Evidence admitted
Category: Interlocutory applications Parties: Regina, Mark William Standen Representation: T Game SC, H Dhanji SC, S Buchen (Crown)
M Ierace SC, G Farmer (Accused)
Commonwealth DPP (Crown)
Gordon Elliot, Elliot Lawyers (Accused)
File Number(s): 2009/8922
Judgment - On admissibility of evidence
HIS HONOUR: Two emails already in evidence are an email of 21 March 2008 at 8.53 from Kinch to the accused, which refers to money laundering and an email of 21 March 2008 at 8.56 from the accused to Kinch, in reply to the first email, which reads in part:-
"Yes very good reasons to be scared of the Pakis at the moment the Kings Cross office of those type of people is in some trouble at the moment".
The Crown asserts that in this email the accused was disclosing information to Mr Kinch in contravention of his obligation under the Crime Commission's informer management policy of never trading information with an informer. The Crown wishes to adduce evidence that a search warrant was executed in Operation Magazine on 20 March 2008, that is the day before the second email, at a shop in Kings Cross, where someone called Ruhul Amin Khan, which could be a Pakistani name, was operating a money exchange. The accused's email is clearly capable of being regarded as referring to the execution of that search warrant.
Counsel for the accused opposes the evidence being adduced on the grounds of late notice given to the defence of an intention to adduce the evidence and on the ground that the probative value of the evidence is outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice to the accused. It was submitted that notice of an intention to adduce the evidence had first been given only the day before, although the prosecution has had years in which to collect its evidence. It was submitted that there was prejudice to the accused in that the accused was called on at this late stage to recall what he may or may not know about this particular operation.
The evidence is clearly relevant as tending to establish a contravention by the accused of the Crime Commission's informer management policy and as tending to show the true nature of the relationship between the accused and Kinch. As regards the lateness and alleged prejudice to the accused I take into account that the search warrant was executed in Operation Magazine of which the accused was the officer-in-charge and I take into account that the Crown is able and willing to supply the defence with the documents on which the evidence proposed to be adduced from Mr Giorgiutti is based.
I consider the probative value of the evidence is strong and is not outweighed by any unfair prejudice to the accused.
**********
Decision last updated: 08 September 2011
0
0
0