R (Commonwealth) v Mark William Standen

Case [2011] NSWSC 1044


Supreme Court


New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R (Commonwealth) v Mark William Standen [2011] NSWSC 1044
Hearing dates:26 May 2011
Decision date: 26 May 2011
Jurisdiction:Common Law - Criminal
Before: James J
Decision:

I consider that all of the documents the admissibility of which was disputed, which I ruled should be admitted, are relevant and of substantial probative force

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 Crime Commission documents)

  1. HIS HONOUR: This short supplementary judgment is to be read with the rulings and reasons given by me at pages 2333 to 2336 of the transcript.

  1. I consider that all of the documents the admissibility of which was disputed, which I ruled should be admitted, are relevant and of substantial probative force as being capable of showing one or more of the following:

Kinch's history of criminality particularly in the importing and trafficking of illicit drugs and that this history was known to the accused; the frequency of contacts between the accused and Kinch in 2003 - 2004; that the relationship between the accused and Kinch in 2003 - 2004 developed far beyond the usual handler-informer relationship; that the accused made representations in favour of Kinch stating matters more favourably to Kinch than was warranted; the beginnings of an improper relationship between the accused and Kinch rendering it more probable that a fully corrupt relationship was in existence during the period alleged in the indictment; matters which can be linked to other matters which occurred during the alleged conspiracy; and that after Kinch left Australia in February 2004 he was still involved in the trafficking and distribution of drugs.

  1. I do not consider that, in the case of any of the documents there was any danger, if the document was admitted, of unfair prejudice to the accused or of collateral issues arising or of procedural unfairness to the accused or any likelihood that the weight which should be given to the document could be significantly affected by other records of the Commission which have not been retrieved.

**********

Details
AGLC
R (Commonwealth) v Mark William Standen [2011] NSWSC 1044
Case
[2011] NSWSC 1044
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Supreme Court of New South Wales heard an application concerning the admissibility of certain documents in the case of Regina v Mark William Standen. The case revolves around allegations of conspiracy to traffic in drugs, and the admissibility of documents related to these charges was contested. The applicant, Mark William Standen, was represented by Mr. Ierace SC and Mr. Farmer, while the Crown was represented by Mr. Game SC, Ms. Dhanji SC, and Mr. Buchen. The Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions also appeared on behalf of the Crown.

The central legal issue before the court was the admissibility of various documents, specifically those from the Crime Commission, which were argued to be prejudicial and irrelevant to the case. The court needed to determine whether these documents should be admitted into evidence given their potential to unfairly prejudice the accused or introduce collateral issues.

The court found that the documents were both relevant and of substantial probative force. They were capable of illustrating key aspects of the case, including the history of criminal activity of a relevant individual, the nature of interactions between the accused and this individual, and the development of their relationship. The court ruled that the documents could be admitted as they did not unfairly prejudice the accused, introduce collateral issues, or result in procedural unfairness. The weight of these documents could be assessed without undue influence from other unrecovered records of the Commission.

The court ordered that all the documents in question, which had been ruled admissible, were to be included as evidence in the trial. This decision was based on the documents' relevance to the case and their probative value, which outweighed any potential prejudice to the accused.

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.