-
R v Keyte
[2022] NZHC 1063
Citation 1
(Para 7)
…as to any requirement regarding the contents of the reasons for verdicts, such requirements are established in a number of authorities; see R v Keyte (2000) 78 SASR 68, Douglass v The Queen (2012) 86 ALJR; and AK v Western Australian (2008) 232 CLR 438 per Hayden J. [1] R v Gardi [2015] SASC 186.…
-
R v Blundell
[2019] SASCFC 84
Citation 2
(Para 9)
…of that evidence in the circumstances of this particular case: Domican v The Queen (1992) 173 CLR 555; R v Turnbull [1977] QB 224. In R v Blundell [2019] SASCFC 84, Peek J, with whom Kourakis CJ and Hughes J agreed, said that s 34AB(4) of the Evidence Act 1929 makes plain that the directions referred to in Domican…
-
R v Smith
[2017] SASCFC 153
Citation 3
(Para 9)
…34AB(4) of the Evidence Act 1929 makes plain that the directions referred to in Domican must be given. That was also the view taken by Stanley J in R v Smith (2017) 129 SASR 237.…
-
Douglass v The Queen
[2012] HCA 34
Citation 4
(Para 7)
…nt regarding the contents of the reasons for verdicts, such requirements are established in a number of authorities; see R v Keyte (2000) 78 SASR 68, Douglass v The Queen (2012) 86 ALJR; and AK v Western Australian (2008) 232 CLR 438 per Hayden J. [1] R v Gardi [2015] SASC 186.…
-
R v Weetra
[2010] SASCFC 52
Citation 5
(Para 9)
…eight in assessing whether the prosecution has proved its case beyond reasonable doubt.[2] [2] Azzopardi v R (2001) 205 CLR 60 at [51] and R v Weetra [2010] SASCFC 52 at [67].…
-
AK v Western Australia
[2008] HCA 8
Citation 6
(Para 7)
…rements are established in a number of authorities; see R v Keyte (2000) 78 SASR 68, Douglass v The Queen (2012) 86 ALJR; and AK v Western Australian (2008) 232 CLR 438 per Hayden J. [1] R v Gardi [2015] SASC 186.…
-
The Queen v Shane Edmund Johnson
[2003] ACTSC 78
Citation 7
(Para 8)
…ssible, in my view, for reasons that are well known, this in court identification is of negligible value: Alexander v R (1981) 145 CLR 395; Festa v R (2001) 208 CLR 593. The ostensible purpose in asking Mr Geytenbeek if he could see the offender in court was to give him the opportunity of reconsidering the matter or…
-
R v Coxon
[2002] SASC 165
Citation 8
(Para 14)
…evidence that the accused was not the offender cannot be excluded beyond reasonable doubt. [36] Festa v The Queen (2001) 208 CLR 593; R v Coxon [2002] SASC 165; Domican v R (1991-1992) 173 CLR 555 Conclusion…
-
Festa v The Queen
[2001] HCA 72
Citation 9
(Para 14)
…. The reasonable hypothesis that is open on the evidence that the accused was not the offender cannot be excluded beyond reasonable doubt. [36] Festa v The Queen (2001) 208 CLR 593; R v Coxon [2002] SASC 165; Domican v R (1991-1992) 173 CLR 555 Conclusion…
-
Pitkin v The Queen
[1995] HCA 30
Citation 10
(Para 8)
…ent told him that a photograph of the offender may or may not be in the booklet. This is the very danger identified by the High Court in Pitkin v R (1995) 130 ALR 35, namely that: a witness who is shown photographs by investigating police will ordinarily be desirous of assisting the police and will be likely to assu…
-
Alexander v the Queen
[1981] HCA 17
Citation 11
(Para 2)
…In Alexander v The Queen (1981) 145 CLR 395, Stephen J discussed the displacement effect: Having been shown a photograph, the memory of it may be more clearly retained than the memory of the original sighting of the offender and may, accordingly, displace the original memory.[33] [33] At 409.…
-
Domican v The Queen
[1991] HCATrans 357
Citation 12
(Para 9)
…s the offender and the factors which may affect my consideration of that evidence in the circumstances of this particular case: Domican v The Queen (1992) 173 CLR 555; R v Turnbull [1977] QB 224. In R v Blundell [2019] SASCFC 84, Peek J, with whom Kourakis CJ and Hughes J agreed, said that s 34AB(4) of the Evidence A…