R v Rogerson; R v McNamara (No 5)

In the case of R v Rogerson; R v McNamara (No 5), the dispute involved two defendants who were charged with murder. The court was required to determine the admissibility and relevance of certain evidence presented by the Crown, including observations of the accused's demeanour and the presence of a lump in the accused's pocket. The defendants argued that some of this evidence was not relevant or was irrelevant, especially in light of the fact that the handgun used in the crime was not recovered.

The legal issues centred on whether the observations made by a witness regarding the accused's demeanour and the presence of a lump in his pocket constituted opinion evidence or were instead factual observations. Additionally, the court had to consider whether these observations were relevant in light of the co-accused's claim of duress, which involved threats made with a firearm. The defendants argued that the evidence was not relevant because the handgun was not found, and the observations were made several hours after the victim's death.

The court determined that the observations of the lump in the accused's pocket were factual observations rather than opinion evidence, and therefore were relevant. The court found that the evidence was relevant to the issue of duress, even though the handgun was not recovered. The court also found that evidence of threatening statements made by one accused regarding the daughters of the co-accused was relevant to the duress claim. Ultimately, the court held that the evidence in question was admissible and relevant to the case.

The final orders of the court allowed for the evidence to be presented in the trial, affirming that the observations and statements were relevant and admissible in determining the defendants' guilt or innocence.