R v Camelo-Gomez (No 3) [2022] NSWSC 257

Supreme Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Camelo-Gomez (No 3) [2022] NSWSC 257 Hearing dates: 28 February 2022, 1 and 2 March 2022 Date of orders: 3 March 2022 Decision date: 14 March 2022 Jurisdiction: Common Law Before: Wilson J Decision: 1 The evidence is admitted, as ordered by the Court on 3 March 2003; see [24] and [48] Catchwords: CRIME – TRIAL – murder – pre-trial hearing to determine admissibility of evidence – question of admissibility of evidence of telephone calls made by the accused – capacity of evidence to rationally affect the assessment of facts in issue – question of prejudice to the accused – questioning admissibility of expert evidence of common or typical injury occasioned by ligature strangulation – whether such evidence is based on specialised knowledge – whether probative value outweighed by prejudicial effect Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) Cases Cited: R v Camelo-Gomez [2022] NSWSC 136 R v Camelo-Gomez (No 2) [2022] NSWSC 211 Category: Procedural rulings Parties: Regina Isabela Carolina Camelo-Gomez Representation: Counsel: D Scully & G Steedman (Crown) B Rigg SC & C Wasley (Accused)

Solicitors: Solicitor for Public Prosecutions (NSW) (Crown) Legal Aid (NSW) (Accused) File Number(s): 2019/298987 Publication restriction: Nil

Judgment 1. HER HONOUR: On 3 March 2022, prior to the commencement of the trial of the accused for a charge of murder, an offence contrary to s 18(1)(a) of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), the Court made orders with respect to the admission of disputed evidence on a number of subjects. Reasons were provided on 3 March 2022 for two of the orders made that day: R v Camelo-Gomez (No 2) [2022] NSWSC 211. The Court's reasons for the balance of the orders, as to the admissibility of telephone calls made by the accused, and the admissibility of expert evidence as to injuries sustained by the accused in November 2001, were reserved until today. 2. These are the last of the pre-trial matters in which rulings were required. The earlier decisions, from which the general background of the matter can be gleaned, are R v Camelo-Gomez [2022] NSWSC 136 and R v Camelo-Gomez (No 2) [2022] NSWSC 211.