R v So (No 3) [2023] NSWSC 1113

Supreme Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v So (No 3) [2023] NSWSC 1113 Hearing dates: 14 August – 17 August 2023 Date of orders: 13 September 2023 Decision date: 14 September 2023 Jurisdiction: Common Law Before: Ierace J Decision: Pursuant to s 192A of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW), I make the following orders: (1) The proposed evidence of Dr Cala concerning the volume of blood that produced stains on carpet in Mr Dickie's bedroom is inadmissible; (2) The proposed evidence of Dr Cala concerning the volume of blood loss that may be fatal in the absence of medical care is admissible; (3) The proposed evidence of Senior Sergeant Gane that a significant blood shedding event occurred in Mr Dickie's bedroom, and his reasoning for that opinion, is admissible; and (4) The stained carpet from Mr Dickie's bedroom, images of that carpet and the results of forensic procedures that were conducted on it are admissible. Catchwords: EVIDENCE – Admissibility – Expert Evidence – Estimation of volume of blood shed on carpet based on dried stains – Proposed evidence of forensic police officer that stains caused by "significant" blood shedding event – Proposed evidence of forensic pathologist providing estimate of quantity of blood shed – Whether witnesses have specialised knowledge derived from training, study or experience – Whether opinions wholly or substantially based on that specialised knowledge Legislation Cited: Evidence Act 1995 (NSW), ss 76, 79(1), 137, 192A Cases Cited: Dasreef Pty Ltd v Hawchar (2011) 243 CLR 588; [2011] HCA 21 Makita (Australia) Pty Ltd v Sprowles (2001) 52 NSWLR 705; [2001] NSWCA 305 R v Niguidula (No 2) [2023] NSWSC 476 R v Ruttley (No 2) [2017] NSWSC 878 Category: Procedural rulings Parties: Rex Kylie So (Accused) Representation: Counsel: L Shaw (Crown) I Nash (Accused)