R v A2; R v Magennis; R v Vaziri (No. 15) - [2015] NSWSC 1545

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v A2; R v Magennis; R v Vaziri (No. 15) [2015] NSWSC 1545
Hearing dates: 15 October 2015
Date of orders: 15 October 2015
Decision date: 15 October 2015
Jurisdiction: Common Law - Criminal
Before: Johnson J
Decision:
Evidence admitted of the Accused Magennis’ registration and employment history as a nurse and midwife in New South Wales.

Catchwords: CRIMINAL LAW - trial for female genital mutilation and associated charges - Accused Magennis who allegedly performed procedures on two girls was a nurse and midwife - Crown tenders details of Accused Magennis’ registration and employment history as nurse and midwife in New South Wales - objection as to relevance - material relevant - evidence admitted
Legislation Cited: Evidence Act 1995
Cases Cited: R v A2; R v KM; R v Vaziri (No. 3) [2015] NSWSC 1264
R v A2; R v Magennis; R v Vaziri (No. 7) [2015] NSWSC 1427
Texts Cited: ---
Category: Procedural and other rulings
Parties: Regina (Crown)
A2 (Accused)
Kubra Magennis (Accused)
Shabbir Mohammedbhai Vaziri (Accused)
Representation:
Counsel:
Ms NL Williams (Crown)
Mr RF Sutherland SC (Accused A2 and Vaziri)
Mr S Bouveng (Accused Kubra Magennis)
Solicitors:
Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (Crown)
Armstrong Legal (Accused)

File Number(s): 2012/280081 (A2)2012/285455 (Kubra Magennis)2012/285639 (Vaziri)
Publication restriction: ---

Judgment (on objection by the accused magennis to tender of evidence concerning the accused magennis’ registration and employment history in new south wales as a nurse and midwife - t1316)

JOHNSON J: The Crown seeks to adduce evidence in this trial, against the Accused Magennis, with respect to particulars of her registration as a nurse and midwife in New South Wales and evidence, such as it is, of her places of employment over a period which spanned 1998 to 2003.
Objection is taken by the Accused Magennis’ counsel to the tender of this material upon the basis of relevance.
The Crown contends that the material is relevant for two purposes.
Firstly, it is submitted that the work history of the Accused Magennis, and her registration as a nurse and midwife, is relevant to the charges of female genital mutilation (“FGM”) brought against her in that they point to some training and skills in dealing with girls in the genital area. The Crown alleges that FGM occurred here by way of “khatna” which, on the Crown case, involved injury to each girl.
Secondly, the Crown seeks to point to a regular period of registration of the Accused Magennis as a nurse and midwife, and her regular employment in the New South Wales health system, in light of the general evidence of Ms Vivienne Strong and Ms Linda George concerning the education programme concerning FGM which was undertaken for health professionals (including nurses and midwives) in New South Wales from 1998.
Although the Crown cannot point to any direct evidence that the Accused Magennis attended any seminar or lecture with respect to FGM as provided to health professionals, the Crown submits…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading R v A2; R v Magennis; R v Vaziri (No. 15)

Details

AGLC: R v A2; R v Magennis; R v Vaziri (No. 15) [2015] NSWSC 1545
Case: [2015] NSWSC 1545
Decision Date: 15 October 2015

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The matter before the court involved three defendants, R v A2, R v Magennis, and R v Vaziri (No. 15), facing charges related to female genital mutilation and associated offences. The trial took place in an unspecified jurisdiction. Magennis, a registered nurse and midwife, was alleged to have performed female genital mutilation procedures on two girls. The Crown sought to present evidence of Magennis' registration and employment history as a nurse and midwife in New South Wales to establish her professional capacity to perform such procedures.

The central legal issue before the court was whether the details of Magennis' registration and employment history were relevant to the charges she faced. The court needed to determine if this information was pertinent to proving her professional capability to carry out the alleged acts. The Crown argued that this evidence was necessary to show Magennis' qualifications and thus her ability to perform the procedures. The defence objected, arguing that this information was irrelevant and potentially prejudicial.

The court ruled that the evidence of Magennis' registration and employment history was relevant and admissible. The court found that this material was necessary to understand her professional background and capability, which was pertinent to the charges of performing female genital mutilation. The court acknowledged that such evidence could assist in determining the likelihood of the defendant's involvement in the alleged acts, given her professional role and qualifications. As such, the evidence was allowed into the trial.

Orders