R v Stephen; R v Tadrosse (No 3)

In the case of R v Stephen; R v Tadrosse (No 3), the applicants were convicted of conspiracy to murder and were seeking to exclude certain evidence from their trial. The nature of the dispute involved the admissibility of evidence related to financial gain expectations and the use of an audio-visual link for witness testimony. The case was heard in the High Court of Australia.

The central legal issues addressed by the court were whether evidence pertaining to the expectation of financial gain was prejudicial under section 137 of the Evidence Act, if lies could be admitted as proof of consciousness of guilt, and whether the view of the trial judge regarding the admissibility of evidence was warranted. Additionally, the court examined whether evidence could be presented through an audio-visual link.

The court found that evidence about the expectation of financial gain was not necessarily prejudicial and could be relevant to the conspiracy charge. Regarding the admission of lies as proof of consciousness of guilt, the court determined that such evidence could be admitted if it directly implicated the accused in the crime. The court also upheld the trial judge's view on the admissibility of the evidence, finding it to be a correct application of the law. Finally, the court held that evidence could indeed be given by audio-visual link, provided it did not compromise the fairness of the trial.

The final orders of the court were that the evidence in question was admissible and that the convictions of the applicants were upheld. The audio-visual link for witness testimony was deemed acceptable, subject to the maintenance of trial fairness.