R v Macdonald; R v Edward Obeid; R v Moses Obeid (No 13)

In this case, the appellants were convicted of various criminal offences, including conspiracy to pervert the course of justice and conspiracy to defraud the Australian Taxation Office. The trial judge admitted statements made by a witness, who was deceased at the time of the trial, under the hearsay exception in section 65(2) of the Evidence Act. The appellants challenged the admissibility of these statements on the grounds that they were improperly or illegally obtained and should be excluded under section 138(1) of the Act. The appellants appealed their convictions on the basis that the trial judge erred in admitting the statements.
The primary legal issue before the court was whether the trial judge was correct in admitting the witness statements under the hearsay exception in section 65(2) of the Evidence Act, and whether the statements were properly admitted under the business record exception. The appellants argued that the statements were improperly or illegally obtained and should be excluded under section 138(1) of the Evidence Act. The court was required to determine whether the trial judge exercised the discretion under section 138(1) of the Act correctly and whether the statements should have been excluded.
The court held that the trial judge was correct in admitting the witness statements under the hearsay exception in section 65(2) of the Evidence Act, and that the statements were properly admitted under the business record exception. The court found that the statements were not improperly or illegally obtained and that the trial judge exercised the discretion under section 138(1) of the Act correctly in admitting the statements. The court held that the appellants' convictions were safe and that there was no miscarriage of justice. The court dismissed the appeal.
The court made no orders regarding the convictions of the appellants.