Supreme Court of Tasmania Law Lists for Wednesday, 5 November 2014

SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA LAW LISTS FOR WEDNESDAY, 5 NOVEMBER 2014

HOBART
Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice TENNENT
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Trial
Nathan Robert Griffith
(Part-Heard)

2:15 p.m.
For Mention
Vance Roy Lobban

For Bail Consent
Ian Bruce Rushton

Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice WOOD
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00a.m.
For Trial

Gregory Patrick Kotynia-English
(Part Heard)

Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice ESTCOURT
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00a.m.
For Mention
Trysten Anthony Bennett

For Disputed Facts Hearing
Adrian Raymond Nattey
(Part-Heard)

LAUNCESTON
Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Justice PEARCE
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00am For Trial (Part Heard)
Jacob Scott Kevin Riley-McDonald

4:15pm For Sentence
Cameron James Brasher

Court 2, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Justice PORTER
Criminal Jurisdiciton
10:00am For Trial (Part Heard)
Nicholas Charles Pitt

BURNIE
No list for Burnie
______________________________________________________
(Note: Initials are used where publication of a person's name is not permitted by law.)

MAGISTRATES COURT LISTS available at:

Email subscriptions to the law lists of other courts can be requested at:

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Supreme Court of Tasmania, several criminal cases were scheduled for various hearings on November 5, 2014. The proceedings were held in both Hobart and Launceston, involving multiple judges and cases. The first case, heard in Hobart by Justice Tennent, involved Nathan Robert Griffith, who was scheduled for a part-heard trial. Another case in Launceston, presided over by Justice Pearce, was that of Jacob Scott Kevin Riley-McDonald, also part of a part-heard trial. Furthermore, Justice Porter in Launceston presided over a part-heard trial for Nicholas Charles Pitt. Additionally, Trysten Anthony Bennett had a disputed facts hearing in Hobart before Justice Estcourt, and Adrian Raymond Nattey had a part-heard matter.

The legal issues in these cases likely pertained to the interpretation of evidence, the admissibility of specific testimonies, and the application of criminal law principles to the facts presented. Each case would have required the court to carefully consider the procedural aspects of the criminal justice system, including the rights of the accused, the burden of proof, and the standards for establishing guilt or innocence. The judges would also have to ensure that the proceedings were conducted fairly and in accordance with legal protocols.

The court's reasoning would have involved a detailed analysis of the evidence provided, the application of relevant legal statutes, and the consideration of any legal arguments presented by the parties. The outcomes would depend on whether the prosecution successfully demonstrated the guilt of the defendants beyond a reasonable doubt. In cases where trials were part-heard, the court would have made interim decisions that could influence the direction and final outcome of the trial. The final orders would have been made at the conclusion of the trials, imposing sentences or other legal consequences on the defendants found guilty.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established