R v Punter [2019] NSWDC 964

District Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Punter [2019] NSWDC 964 Hearing dates: Wednesday 3 – Friday 4 April 2019 Date of orders: Tuesday 9 April 2019 Decision date: 09 April 2019 Jurisdiction: Criminal Before: Tupman DCJ Decision: Application to exclude Evidence pursuant to S138 Evidence Act, 1995 (NSW) not granted. Catchwords: CRIME — Child sex offences — Using carriage service to groom person <16 years for sexual activity — Admissibility of evidence — s 138 Evidence Act — Accused application to exclude Crown evidence — Facebook messages and recorded telephone calls between accused and person claiming to be 15 years old — Accused submits Facebook messages and recorded telephone calls were obtained improperly —Accused submits police had no reason to suspect him of child grooming — Accused worked as teacher at school — Two students at the school where accused worked made complaint about the accused — One student was 16 and the other was 17 — Police assumed identity of 15 year old online and started communicating with accused – Accused had no criminal history — Probative value of evidence not insignificant. Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1914 (Cth); Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth), ss 474.27, 474.27A(1); Evidence Act 1995 (NSW), ss 138, 138(3); Law Enforcement (Controlled Operations) Act 1997 (NSW), ss 8, 5 (2A); Surveillance Devices Act 2007 (NSW), ss 7(1), 7(4). Cases Cited: Gedeon v Commissioner of NSW Crime Commission (2008) 236 CLR 120; Ridgeway v The Queen (1995) 184 CLR 19; The Queen v Priest [2011] ACTSC 18; The Queen v Stubbs [2009] ACTSC 63. Category: Principal judgment Parties: Regina (The Queen) Mr James Punter (The Accused) Representation: Counsel: Mr. S. Howell (the Crown) Mr. S. Schaudin, (the Applicant) File Number(s): 2017/00141793 Publication restriction: Non-publication of identity of two persons referred to in annexure to statement of Detective Senior Constable Gatward, dated 1 August 2018.