R v Kucukakyuz

[2023] NSWDC 77

District Court

New South Wales

• Amendment notes

Medium Neutral Citation:

R v Kucukakyuz [2023] NSWDC 77

Hearing dates:

16 November 2022

Date of orders:

17 November 2022

Decision date:

31 March 2023

Jurisdiction:

Criminal

Before:

Turnbull SC DCJ

Decision:

1. I direct a verdict in relation to Count 1.

2. Count 2 is to go to the jury.

Catchwords:

CRIMINAL LAW – application for verdict by direction – pervert the course of justice – whether police investigation is “the course of justice” – where police investigation not sufficient – application granted in relation to Count 1 – hinder investigation – application refused in relation to Count 2

Legislation Cited:

Crimes Act 1900 (NSW)

Cases Cited:

Doney v The Queen (1990) 171 CLR 207

Einfeldv The Queen (2008) 252 ALR 375

Johnston v The Queen [2019] NSWCCA 108

May v O’Sullivan (1955) 92 CLR 654

Meissner v R (1995) 184 CLR 132

R v Beckett [2015] HCA 38

R v Karageorge (1998) 103 A Crim R 15

R v MacDonald [2019] NSWSC 1785

R v Machin [1980] 1 WLR 763

R v Obeid (No 2) [2015] NSWSC 1380

R v Rogerson (1992) 174 CLR 268

R v XHR [2012] NSWCCA 247

Category:

Procedural rulings

Parties:

Rex
Filiz Kucukakyuz (Accused)

Representation:

Counsel:
S Beaumont (Crown)
J Glissan KC (Accused)

Solicitors:
Solicitor for Public Prosecutions (NSW) (Crown)
G Willis (Accused)

File Number(s):

2020/220554

Judgment

Application

1. Application is made by Mr Glissan KC on behalf of the accused Filiz Kucukakyuz for a verdict by direction in relation to both counts on the indictment which she currently faces. Argument was heard at the close of the Crown case in the absence of the jury.

2. The two offences are in the alternative, and they are these.

3. Count 1: On 6 May 2020, at Parkes in the State of New South Wales, did provide information to Stephen Brett Howard with intent thereby to pervert the course of justice - s 319 Crimes Act 1900.

4. Count 2: On 6 May 2020, at Parkes in the State of New South Wales, did acts with intent to hinder the investigation of a serious indictable offence by Steven Brett Howard – s 315(1)(a) Crimes Act 1900.

5. The elements of the offences are these:

Count 1:

1. that the accused did any act, namely, provided information, namely:

1. the model and colour of a covert operative vehicle, and

2. a description of the covert operative, namely, that he had grey hair;

2. with intent in any way to pervert the course of justice.

Count 2:

1. that the accused did acts, namely provided information to Steven Howard;

2. intending in any way to hinder;

3. the investigation of a serious indictable offence committed by Steven Howard, namely, the offence of bribery of a police officer.

6. King’s Counsel submits that whilst there is evidence as to the acts, there is no evidence capable of sustaining the elements “with intent in any way to pervert the course of justice” and “intending in any way to hinder”.

7. The accused raises an…