Adam v The Queen [2001] HCA 57

HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

GLEESON CJ,

GAUDRON, McHUGH, KIRBY AND HAYNE JJ

GILBERT ADAM APPELLANT

AND

THE QUEEN RESPONDENT

Adam v The Queen

[2001] HCA 57

11 October 2001

S139/2000

ORDER

Appeal dismissed.

On appeal from the Supreme Court of New South Wales

Representation:

S J Odgers SC with C C Waterstreet and G A Bashir for the appellant (instructed by John B Hajje & Associates)

A M Blackmore with G E Smith for the respondent (instructed by S E O'Connor, Solicitor for Public Prosecutions (New South Wales))

Notice: This copy of the Court's Reasons for Judgment is subject to formal revision prior to publication in the Commonwealth Law Reports.

CATCHWORDS

Adam v The Queen

Criminal law – Evidence – Whether trial judge erred in admitting prior inconsistent statements of prosecution witness – Relevance of prior inconsistent statements – Application of credibility rule – Exceptions to hearsay rule – Prior inconsistent statements as evidence of the truth of the representations.

Criminal law – Evidence – Unfavourable witnesses – Whether trial judge erred in granting prosecution leave to cross-examine its own witness – Unreliable evidence.

Evidence – Prior inconsistent statements – Relevance of such statements – Whether evidence of the truth of representations – Whether judge erred in granting leave to prosecutor to cross-examine its own witness.

Evidence Act 1995 (NSW), ss 38(1), 38(3), 38(6), 55(1), 59(1), 60, 102, 103, 192(2).

1. GLEESON CJ, McHUGH, KIRBY AND HAYNE JJ. The appellant, Gilbert Adam, and his brother, Richard, were charged with the murder of a police constable, David Carty, at Fairfield, New South Wales, on 18 April 1997. Both were also charged with some other offences. After a trial in the Supreme Court of New South Wales (before Wood CJ at CL and a jury) the appellant was found guilty of murder; his brother was acquitted of murder but found guilty of maliciously inflicting grievous bodily harm on Constable Carty.