R v Keli Lane [No 17]

[2010] NSWSC 1544

NEW SOUTH WALES SUPREME COURT

CITATION:
R v Keli LANE [No 17] [2010] NSWSC 1544

JURISDICTION:

FILE NUMBER(S):
2009/256171

HEARING DATE(S):
09/08/2010 - 13/12/2010

JUDGMENT DATE:
11 November 2010

PARTIES:
Regina (Crown)
Keli LANE (Accused)

JUDGMENT OF:
Whealy J     

LOWER COURT JURISDICTION:
Supreme Court

LOWER COURT FILE NUMBER(S):

LOWER COURT JUDICIAL OFFICER:

COUNSEL:
M Tedeschi QC / H Baker (Crown)
K Chapple SC / S Sloane (Accused)

SOLICITORS:
Director of Public Prosecutions (Crown)
K Laurie, Archbold Legal Solutions (Accused)

CATCHWORDS:

LEGISLATION CITED:
Crimes Act 1900 s 22A

CATEGORY:
Procedural and other rulings

CASES CITED:

TEXTS CITED:

DECISION:

JUDGMENT:

- 1 -

IN THE SUPREME COURT
OF NEW SOUTH WALES
COMMON LAW DIVISION
CRIMINAL LIST

WHEALY J

THURSDAY 11 NOVEMBER 2010

2009/256171     REGINA v Keli LANE

JUDGMENT: Re issue of infanticide – see p 2773 of transcript

1. HIS HONOUR: It is necessary to give a ruling on the matter that the Crown has raised, that is the issue whether there is any material in the evidence that would warrant, in this trial, the issue of infanticide under section 22A of the Crimes Act 1900 being left before the jury.

2. The Crown has submitted that there is no evidence that would warrant that course being taken.  Mr Chapple agrees with this submission and indicates that, for his part, he would not embrace the possibility of that issue being raised before the jury.  He will not raise it in the defence case and he has not raised it during the Crown case.  Nevertheless, the court has an independent obligation to scrutinise the evidence, even where a matter has been abandoned by the defence or not raised by the defence, so in that respect I have considered the whole of the evidence in the Crown case and I am satisfied that I should not leave for the consideration of the jury any issue that relates to infanticide.

**********

LAST UPDATED:
22 February 2011