HUMAN RIGHTS ACT
SUPREME COURT OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY
Case Title: | R v BNS |
Citation: | [2016] ACTSC 51 |
Hearing Date: | 23 March 2016 |
DecisionDate: | 24 March 2016 |
Before: | Refshauge J |
Decision: | SN give evidence by audio visual link from a room in the ACT which is outside the court room in which the trial is being heard. |
Catchwords: | CRIMINAL LAW – Jurisdiction, practice and procedure – trial EVIDENCE – Evidence of complaint – relationship evidence – history of family violence by accused against witness – accused has conviction for intimidating witness – evidence via audio visual link from a remote location – pre conditions in s 32 of the Evidence (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1991 (ACT) – convenience of giving evidence via audio visual link – fairness to accused – no objection by defendant |
Legislation Cited: | Crimes Act 1900 (ACT), s 62(6) Evidence Act 2011 (ACT), s 66 Court Procedures Rules 2006 (ACT), r 6703 |
Cases Cited: | Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v StoresOnline International Inc [2009] FCA 717 Brodie v Streeter (2003) 180 FLR 176 |
Parties: | The Queen (Crown) BNS (Defendant) |
Representation: | Counsel Ms J Campbell (Crown) Mr J Sabharwal (Defendant) |
| Solicitors ACT Director of Public Prosecutions (Crown) Legal Aid ACT (Defendant) | |
File Number: | SCC 53 of 2015 |
REFSHAUGE J:
The accused, BNS, has pleaded not guilty of two counts of incest and five counts of committing an act of indecency on TN. At the time, BNS was in a relationship with SN, the mother of TN. TN was, within the meaning of s 62(6) of the Crimes Act 1900 (ACT), said to be the step child of BNS.
SN has been called to give evidence at the trial and is expected to give evidence of complaint made by TN as to the acts charged, admissible under s 66 of the Evidence Act 2011 (ACT). She is also expected to give what is known as relationship evidence (see HML v The Queen (2008) 235 CLR 334) setting out her and her children’s relationship with BNS as the setting or context for the alleged offending.
Application has been…
Continue reading R v BNS
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- R v BNS [2016] ACTSC 51
- Case
- [2016] ACTSC 51
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court had to consider whether the evidence of the witness would be reliable and fair if given via an audio-visual link. It was noted that the witness had a history of family violence by the accused and the accused had a prior conviction for intimidating the witness. Despite these concerns, the court assessed that the conditions for the use of audio-visual links were satisfied, particularly in terms of the convenience for the witness and the absence of any objection from the defence. The court concluded that the evidence given by the witness from a remote location would not prejudice the fairness of the trial.
The Supreme Court ruled that the evidence of the witness could be admitted via an audio-visual link from a room in the ACT outside the courtroom where the trial was being conducted. This decision was made in light of the convenience for the witness and the absence of any objection from the defence regarding the manner of the testimony. The court also noted that the potential for prejudice to the accused was minimal given the circumstances and the prior relationship between the parties. The decision was made in accordance with the provisions of section 32 of the Evidence (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1991 (ACT).
Orders
Orders of the court
SN give evidence by audio visual link from a room in the ACT which is outside the court room in which the trial is being heard.
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.