R v Droudis (No. 9)

[2016] NSWSC 1299

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation:	R v Droudis (No. 9) [2016] NSWSC 1299
Hearing dates:	12 September 2016
Date of orders:	12 September 2016
Decision date:	12 September 2016
Jurisdiction:	Common Law - Criminal
Before:	Johnson J
Decision:	Letter dated 22 April 2014 from Accused to Man Monis admitted.
Catchwords:	CRIMINAL LAW – Judge-alone trial for murder - tender of letter from Accused to Man Monis - letter written one year after murder of Monis’ ex-wife - Crown case that there was a close romantic relationship with religious overtones between Accused and Monis before and after murder - letter admitted
Legislation Cited:	Evidence Act 1995
Cases Cited:	---
Texts Cited:	---
Category:	Procedural and other rulings
Parties:	Regina (Crown) Amirah Droudis (Accused)
Representation:	Counsel: Mr M Tedeschi QC; Mr DT Scully (Crown) Mr MJ Ierace SC; Mr RJ Wilson (Accused)   Solicitors: Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (Crown) Legal Aid NSW (Accused)
File Number(s):	2013/345405
Publication restriction:	---

JUDGMENT

1. JOHNSON J: In the course of the evidence-in-chief of the officer-in-charge, Detective Melanie Staples, the Crown is tendering a variety of items for different purposes.

2. The Crown has tendered a letter from the Accused to Man Monis dated 22 April 2014. This letter was located on 15 December 2014 when a search was undertaken of premises at Denman Avenue, Wiley Park, the then premises of the Accused and Monis.

3. The letter has been described accurately by Senior Counsel for the Accused as being a “love letter”, which outlines certain expressions of endearment and also the ongoing efforts of the Accused and her daughter to learn certain religious texts. The Court has been informed that, at the time that this letter was written, Monis was in custody on certain sexual assault charges.

4. The basis of the objection is that the letter is more than one year after the killing of the deceased at Werrington on 21 April 2013. It is submitted it is simply not relevant to any issues in the trial.

5. The Crown submits that the letter is a piece of evidence which sheds light on what is said to be an ongoing relationship between the Accused and Monis that commenced in about 2006. I have allowed evidence to be given of aspects of that relationship in a pretrial decision, which allowed the Crown to adduce evidence of relationship between Monis and the Accused, with that evidence bearing on issues of motive, the state of mind of the Accused and also for tendency purposes.

6. It is the Crown case that the Accused killed the deceased effectively at the behest of Monis. As part of that case, the Crown has sought to adduce evidence of the relationship between the Accused and Monis at various times leading up to the killing of the deceased, and to an extent afterwards.

7. For the purpose of establishing a relationship or a state of mind or a connection of an emotional and religious type between the Accused and Monis over a period of time, particular incidents or events at different times along the way may shed light.

8. I do not accept the submission on behalf of the Accused that there is a type of cut-off point at some time after the killing of the deceased in April 2013.

9. The question is what inferences are available and might be drawn, having regard to pieces of evidence which may be looked at, ultimately, together. In outlining these matters I am not, of course, expressing any concluded view on issues in this trial.

10. The purpose of saying these things is to explain why, in my view, this letter is relevant. If, for example, there had been some piece of evidence which showed the cessation of any relationship between the Accused and Monis, either before the killing or at some time after, that itself may have been relevant. However, this letter forms part of a number of pieces of evidence which the Crown says suggest an ongoing relationship for years before the killing in 2013 and with that relationship ongoing in April 2014.

11. I have considered whether this piece of evidence is too remote to be relevant to the issues in the trial. However, I am satisfied that it is, for the purpose of the relevance test in the Evidence Act 1995, sufficiently connected to the issues in the proceedings as to make it relevant.

12. What use is to be made of it, of course, is a matter for the future to be considered in the light of all the evidence in the trial.

13. I allow the Crown to tender the letter of 22 April 2014 from the Accused to Man Monis.

**********

Decision last updated: 07 November 2016