R v Tangi (No 3)

In the case of R v Tangi (No 3), the Crown sought the admissibility of additional evidence, referred to as AVL evidence, to further protect the identities of witnesses whose names were already suppressed. The matter was heard in the Supreme Court of Victoria. The Crown argued that the additional evidence was necessary to prevent potential unfairness to the witnesses, who were already testifying under suppressed identities due to the serious nature of the allegations against the accused.

The court was tasked with determining whether the use of AVL evidence was appropriate in this context and whether its admission would cause unfairness to the accused. The legal issues before the court included the balance between protecting the identities of witnesses and ensuring a fair trial for the accused. The court had to consider the potential prejudice that the additional evidence might cause to the accused, as well as the public interest in protecting the witnesses.

In its decision, the court determined that the Crown's application for AVL evidence was refused. The court held that the potential unfairness to the accused outweighed the benefits of further protecting the witnesses' identities. The court noted that the witnesses were already testifying under stringent measures, and additional evidence would not significantly alter the proceedings. The court emphasised the importance of ensuring a fair trial for the accused while also protecting the witnesses to the extent possible under existing measures. The court's decision balanced the rights of both parties, ultimately ruling that the admission of AVL evidence was not warranted in this case.