R v Taumalolo & Ors (No 1) [2021] NSWSC 1427

Supreme Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Taumalolo & Ors (No 1) [2021] NSWSC 1427 Hearing dates: 6, 7 & 11 October 2021 Date of orders: 25 November 2021 Decision date: 25 November 2021 Jurisdiction: Common Law Before: Davies J Decision: Evidentiary rulings as identified in paragraphs [31], [34], [37], [40], [43], [46], [49], [52], [55], [57], [60], [63], [66], [68], [71], [74], [77], [80], [91], [100], [106], [108], [110], [113], [121], [151], [155], [160], [164], [168], [171], [178], [186], [189], [206], [215], [219] and [226] of the judgment Catchwords: EVIDENCE – criminal proceedings – application to exclude evidence – application brought by three accused charged with murder of deceased – evidence concerns intercepted phone calls prior to arrest and gaol calls when accused in custody, social media posts, witness statements and a music video – whether evidence is relevant – whether evidence if relevant is unfairly prejudicial EVIDENCE – criminal proceedings – consciousness of guilt – Crown relies on evidence that one accused changed physical appearance shortly after police posted media release with his picture – where accused charged with murder/manslaughter and affray from assault causing death – where accused facing separate charge of affray from another incident – whether evidence of change of appearance was intractably neutral between various charges – where it was open to jury to infer accused's reason for altering appearance came from realisation of involvement in the murder – evidence admissible and capable of amounting to consciousness of guilt evidence EVIDENCE – criminal proceedings – state of mind – evidence of conduct of accused to demonstrate state of mind – where conduct demonstrated shows aggressive state of mind shortly before altercation with deceased – evidence not unfairly prejudicial EVIDENCE – criminal proceedings - hearsay – lay opinion evidence – evidence concerning gang membership by accused – where evidence derived from social media – evidence inadmissible Legislation Cited: Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) ss 55, 56, 76, 78, 135, 137 Cases Cited: Kuehne v R [2012] NSWCCA 270 Lithgow City Council v Jackson (2011) 244 CLR 352; [2011] HCA 36 Mulvihill v R [2016] NSWCCA 259 R v Adam (1999) 47 NSWLR 267; [1999] NSWCCA 189 R v Brooks [2017] NSWSC 188 R v Ciantar (2006) 16 VR 26; [2006] VSCA 263 R v Hawi (No 1) [2011] NSWSC 1647 R v Player [2000] NSWCCA 123 Texts Cited: Nil Category: Procedural rulings Parties: Crown Mateaki Jeff Taumalolo (Accused) Suliasi Levula Taumalolo (Accused) ET (Accused) ST (Accused) Sione Taulepa Mayol (Accused) Representation: Counsel: D Daleo & K Marinos (Crown) P English (Mateaki Jeff Taumalolo) N Carroll (Suliasi Levula Taumalolo) N Mikhaeil (ET) R Wilson SC (ST) C Davenport SC (Sione Fieilo Taulepa Mayol)