R v Rogerson; R v McNamara (No 3)

The respondents, Rogerson and McNamara, were jointly charged with murder and the supply of a prohibited drug. The trial was held in the Supreme Court of New South Wales, where the respondents made several applications. One respondent sought to rely on certain evidence as tendency evidence, while both respondents applied for separate trials for the murder and drug supply charges. Additionally, one respondent applied for an order to try the murder and drug supply charges separately.

The legal issues before the court included whether the proposed tendency evidence was relevant to a fact in issue and whether it went to the credibility of the co-accused. The court also needed to consider the general principles applicable to the exercise of the discretion to order separate trials, as well as whether there was any justification for separating the murder and drug supply counts.

The court found that the proposed tendency evidence did not go to a fact in issue and was not relevant to the credibility of the co-accused. Consequently, the application to rely on the evidence was refused. The court determined that both applications for separate trials were not justified, as the Crown's case for the murder charge was based on a joint criminal enterprise, and the majority of the evidence was admissible against both respondents for both charges. Furthermore, the court held that the murder and drug supply charges were inextricably linked, and there was no justification for separating the counts.

The final orders of the court were that the application to rely on the proposed tendency evidence was refused, and both applications for separate trials were also refused.