Regina v Gilbert Adam

Gilbert Adam was convicted of murder and appealed against his conviction. The appeal centred on whether the verdict was unsafe and unsatisfactory, given an inadvertent and potentially prejudicial event that occurred during the trial. The jury was exposed to material not admitted into evidence, and the court needed to determine if the direction given to the jury overcame any prejudice caused by this event. The appeal also addressed the admissibility of hearsay evidence and its relevance under the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW). Specifically, the court considered whether the 'purpose' of the evidence should be determined subjectively or objectively and whether the evidence was admissible under the exception for criminal proceedings where the maker is available, particularly if it was 'fresh in the memory'.

The court examined the hearsay rule and its exceptions, focusing on whether the evidence of previous representation was relevant for a purpose other than proving the fact intended to be asserted by the representation, as per section 60 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW). Additionally, the court assessed whether the evidence was admissible under section 66 of the Act, considering if it was 'fresh in the memory'. The court determined that the prejudicial event did not render the verdict unsafe and unsatisfactory, as the direction provided to the jury effectively mitigated any potential prejudice. The court also concluded that the hearsay evidence was relevant and admissible under the specified exceptions, considering both the subjective and objective aspects of its purpose.

The court found that the verdict was safe and satisfactory, despite the inadvertent exposure of the jury to material not admitted into evidence. The direction provided to the jury effectively addressed any potential prejudice, ensuring the fairness of the trial. Furthermore, the court upheld the admissibility of the hearsay evidence under the relevant exceptions of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW), considering both the subjective and objective purposes of the evidence and its 'fresh in the memory' status. The appeal was ultimately dismissed, affirming the conviction.