R v Agius; R v Castagna (No 5)

In the case of R v Agius; R v Castagna, the respondents were convicted of conspiracy to commit murder. The central issue in the appeal was the admissibility of a trust deed that the respondents argued could be used to impugn their credibility or as evidence of a deliberate lie amounting to a consciousness of guilt. The trust deed was said to name the International Red Cross as the primary beneficiary, despite the respondents' claims in their voluntary disclosure statements that the trust was intended to benefit their families. The Crown confirmed that it would not use the trust deed to impugn the credibility of the respondents or as evidence of a consciousness of guilt.

The court considered whether the probative value of the trust deed was outweighed by any prejudicial effect. The respondents argued that the deed could be used to suggest they were lying about the purpose of the trust, which would undermine their credibility. However, the Crown assured the court that it would not use the deed in this manner. The court acknowledged the potential for prejudice but concluded that the probative value of the evidence in establishing the existence of the trust and the respondents' intent was not outweighed by any prejudicial effect. The trust deed was thus deemed admissible.

The court's reasoning was grounded in the balance between the probative value of the evidence and any prejudicial effect it might have. Given the Crown's assurance that the trust deed would not be used to impugn the respondents' credibility or as evidence of a consciousness of guilt, the court found that the evidence could be used to establish the existence of the trust and the respondents' intent without unfairly prejudicing the respondents. The appeal was dismissed, and the trust deed remained admissible in evidence.