The Queen v Smiler (No 1)

In the case of The Queen v Smiler (No 1), the defendant contested the admissibility of statements made by a deceased individual under the Evidence (National Uniform Legislation) Act 2011 (NT). The statements in question were alleged to have been made by a deceased individual during the course of an assault involving the defendant and another individual. The primary legal issue before the court was whether these statements, which were hearsay, could be admitted under the exceptions provided by the statute.

The court was tasked with determining if the statements made to Senior Constable Leggett on 11 April 2016 were admissible under section 65(2)(b) of the Evidence (National Uniform Legislation) Act 2011 (NT). This section allows for the admission of statements made when or shortly after the asserted facts occurred, if it is unlikely that the statements are fabrications. The court had to consider the timing of the statements in relation to the events, the nature of the events, and the likelihood that the declarant's memory would have been clear. The Crown bore the onus of proving that the statements were admissible.

Upon review, the court found that the statements made to Senior Constable Leggett were indeed made on the same night as the alleged assaults, which fell within the ordinary usage of "shortly after." Given the traumatic nature of the events described, the court determined that it was likely the declarant's memory of the events would have been clear. Consequently, the court ruled that the statements were admissible under section 65(2)(b) of the Act.