Nicholls v The Queen

Coates v The Queen [2005] HCA 1
Judgment date
Case number
P79/2003
P81/2003
Before
Gleeson CJ, McHugh, Gummow, Kirby, Hayne, Callinan, Heydon JJ
Catchwords

Criminal law – Evidence – Admissibility of admissions made off-video during interview with accused – Whether reasonable excuse for not videotaping admissions – Criminal Code (WA), s 570D(2)(b), (4).

Criminal law – Evidence ¬– Admissibility of evidence of prior inconsistent statement of witness – Whether evidence of statement went to issue – Whether admissible as exception to rule against admission of collateral statements – Whether exceptions of bias, interest or corruption applicable – Whether the detail of alleged statement indicating an exception to the collateral evidence rule must be put specifically to the witness in cross-examination.

Evidence – Criminal trial – Prior inconsistent statement of witness – Whether admissible as exception to rule against collateral statements – Admissions allegedly made off-video during interview by police – Whether reasonable excuse for not videotaping such admissions.

Criminal law – Evidence – Whether evidence of prior inconsistent statement hearsay – Whether exception to hearsay rule.

Criminal law – Jury directions – Whether trial judge's direction accorded with McKinney v The Queen – Appropriateness of reference to possible perjury on part of police.

Criminal law – Evidence – Admissions – Adequacy of trial judge's direction – Whether need for McKinney direction.

Words and phrases – "interview", "reasonable excuse".

Criminal Code (WA) – s 570D.

Evidence Act 1906 (WA) – s 21.

Files
1.rtf (199.62 KB)
1.pdf (477.92 KB)