R v Turnbull (No. 15)

[2016] NSWSC 787

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation:	R v Turnbull (No. 15) [2016] NSWSC 787
Hearing dates:	9 May 2016
Date of orders:	09 May 2016
Decision date:	09 May 2016
Jurisdiction:	Common Law - Criminal
Before:	Johnson J
Decision:	Evidence of observations of witness in September 2014 allowed.
Catchwords:	CRIMINAL LAW - murder trial - shooting of environmental officer on 29 July 2014 - defence objection to particular evidence from ecologist employed by the Office of Environment and Heritage - evidence concerns observations of area of land in September 2014 compared with its state in April 2014 - evidence allowed
Legislation Cited:	---
Cases Cited:	---
Texts Cited:	---
Category:	Procedural and other rulings
Parties:	Regina (Crown) Ian Robert Turnbull (Accused)
Representation:	Counsel: Mr PE Barrett (Crown) Mr T Alexis SC; Ms C O’Neill (Accused)   Solicitors: Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (Crown) Cole & Butler (Accused)
File Number(s):	2014/223920
Publication restriction:	---

Judgment

1. JOHNSON J: The Crown seeks to adduce from Dr Christopher Nadolny, evidence of observations in September 2014 by reference to an area of land on the property, “Colorado”. The Crown has indicated that the evidence sought to be led is that, when Dr Nadolny inspected the property in September 2014, the relevant area had been cleared.

2. Objection is taken to the relevance of this evidence, in particular, by reference to the fact that the Accused had in fact killed Mr Turner on 29 July 2014, and had been in custody continuously from that evening.

3. The evidence presently being given by Dr Nadolny relates to events surrounding proceedings before the Land and Environment Court in 2014 by reference to remediation directions which had been given by the Office of Environment and Heritage.

4. The presently relevant area has been referred to by Dr Nadolny as having not been cleared when he visited the property, with other experts, in April 2014 as part of an onsite inspection by the conclave of experts.

5. Exhibits R and S, read together, indicate that the Chief Judge of the Land and Environment Court on 25 June 2014 included, in a portion marked for remediation, an area which is the subject of the expected evidence from Dr Nadolny by reference to his September 2014 inspection. The area in question is what might be described as the right-hand side of the saddle-bag shaped area marked in yellow on “Colorado” as depicted in Exhibit R.

6. It is true that the Accused had been arrested, charged and detained following the tragic events of 29 July 2014. However, the chronology of events which have been considered so far involve the inspection by Dr Nadolny in April 2014 and the orders made by the Chief Judge of the Land and Environment Court on 25 June 2014. What is now sought to be led is evidence of an inspection in September 2014.

7. Given the proximity of the events surrounding land clearing (in the context of remediation orders) to the events on 29 July 2014, and the words which the Accused said on that occasion as explained to the jury by Mr Strange, I am satisfied that this evidence is relevant.

8. If it be the case that the area in question was only cleared after 29 July 2014, then that may be a matter for evidence from someone with direct knowledge of the topic. However, it does seem to me that the fact that that land was cleared in September 2014 is relevant to issues in the trial and I allow it.

**********

Decision last updated: 20 June 2016