Macdonald, Ian v R; Edward Obeid v R; Moses Obeid v R [2023] NSWCCA 250

Court of Criminal Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Macdonald, Ian v R; Edward Obeid v R; Moses Obeid v R [2023] NSWCCA 250 Hearing dates: 17 – 20 April 2023 Date of orders: 6 October 2023 Decision date: 06 October 2023 Before: Bell CJ; Basten AJA; Button J Decision: In each matter: (1) To the extent necessary, grant leave pursuant to s 5(1)(a) of the Criminal Appeal Act 1912 to appeal against conviction. (2) Dismiss the appeal. Catchwords: CRIME – conspiracy – conspiracy to commit common law offence of wilful misconduct in public office – elements of conspiracy – element of misconduct created by conflict between self-interest and public duty – need to establish causal element – whether agreement to do undertake a particular act(s) required – whether each participant in the conspiracy must agree to carry out act(s) in furtherance of unlawful purpose – whether motive of parties to be established – need to prove parties agreed as to quality of misconduct – conduct to be serious and meriting criminal punishment CRIMINAL PROCEDURE – elements of a conspiracy – each element and fact that are necessary links in the chain to conviction to be established beyond reasonable doubt – whether Shepherd direction required CRIMINAL PROCEDURE – judge alone trial – nature of warnings – warning to be "taken into account" – whether to be recorded in reasons – application of Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW), s 133(3) CRIMINAL PROCEDURE – conviction – appeal – verdict unreasonable or not supported by the evidence – appeal court to conduct independent assessment of evidence – consideration of all circumstantial evidence – relevance of reasons of trial judge – Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW), s 6(1), first limb – challenge to individual findings – whether finding indispensable to conviction – standard of review EVIDENCE – admissions – hearsay rule – conduct of one conspirator admissible as admission by other conspirator – operation of Evidence Act 1995 (NSW), ss 57(2), 87(1)(c) EVIDENCE – admissions – lies – consciousness of guilt – need for direction in accordance with Edwards v The Queen EVIDENCE – unreliability – description of map – whether tantamount to identification evidence – whether warning required under Evidence Act 1995 (NSW), s 165(2) Legislation Cited: Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW), ss 5, 6, 8 Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW), ss 132, 133 (former ss 32, 33) Evidence Act 1995 (NSW), ss 38, 55-57, 81, 87, 165 Mining Act 1992 (NSW), ss 13, 14, 22, 368 Mining Regulation 2016 (NSW), Pt 3, Div 1 Cases Cited: Adam v The Queen (2001) 207 CLR 96; [2001] HCA 57 Ahern v The Queen (1988) 165 CLR 87; [1988] HCA 39 Australian Competition & Consumer Commission v Leahy Petroleum Pty Ltd (2007) 160 FCR 321; [2007] FCA 794 Chamberlain v The Queen (No 2) (1984) 153 CLR 521; [1984] HCA 7 Dansie v The Queen (2022) 96 ALJR 728; [2022] HCA 25 Domican v The Queen (1992) 173 CLR 555; [1992] HCA 13 Edwards v The Queen (1993) 178 CLR 193; [1993] HCA 63 EE v R [2023] NSWCCA 188 Elomar v The Queen (2014) 300 FLR 323; [2014] NSWCCA 303 Fennell v The Queen (2019) 93 ALJR 1219; [2019] HCA 37 Filippou v The Queen (2015) 256 CLR 47; [2015] HCA 29 Fleming v The Queen (1998) 197 CLR 250; [1998] HCA 68 Fox v Percy (2003) 214 CLR 118; [2003] HCA 22 Gerakiteys v The Queen (1984) 153 CLR 317; [1984] HCA 8 Glasser v United States (1942) 315 US 60 Higgins v R [2020] NSWCCA 149 HKSAR v Hui Rafael Junior (2017) 20 HKCFAR 264 Hofer v The Queen (2021) 274 CLR 351; [2021] HCA 36 IW v City of Perth (1997) 191 CLR 1 Jones v Dunkel (1959) 101 CLR 298; [1959] HCA 8 Kanaan v R [2006] NSWCCA 109 M v The Queen (1994) 181 CLR 487; [1994] HCA 63 Mahmood v The State of Western Australia (2008) 232 CLR 397; [2008] HCA 1 Maitland v R; Macdonald v R (2019) 99 NSWLR 376; [2019] NSWCCA 32 Mohana v R [2023] NSWCCA 61 Mulcahy v The Queen (1868) LR 3 HL 306 Obeid v R (2015) 91 NSWLR 226; [2015] NSWCCA 309 Peacock v The King (1911) 13 CLR 619 Peters v The Queen (1998) 192 CLR 493; [1998] HCA 7 R v Agius [2011] NSWSC 367 R v Boulanger [2006] 2 SCR 49 R v Clout (1995) 41 NSWLR 312 R v Dolding (2018) 100 NSWLR 314; [2018] NSWCCA 127 R v Gill and Henry (1818) 2 B & Ad 204, 205; 106 ER 341 R v Kurtic (1996) 85 A Crim R 57 R v Llewellyn-Jones (1966) 51 Cr App R 4 R v Macdonald, Edward Obeid, Moses Obeid (No 15) [2020] NSWSC 1949 R v O'Brien (1974) 59 Cr App R 222 R v O'Donoghue (1988) 34 A Crim R 397 R v Speechley [2005] 2 Cr App R (S) 75; [2004] EWCA Crim 3067 Richardson v The Queen (1974) 131 CLR 116; [1974] HCA 19 Romeyko v Samuels (1972) 2 SASR 529 RPS v The Queen (2000) 199 CLR 620; [2000] HCA 3 Shepherd v The Queen (1990) 170 CLR 573; [1990] HCA 56 Shum Kwok Sher v HKSAR (2002) 5 HKCFAR 381 Simic v The Queen (1980) 144 CLR 319; [1980] HCA 25 Sin Kam Wah v HKSAR (2005) 8 HKCFAR 192 SKA v The Queen (2011) 243 CLR 400; [2011] HCA 13 The King and the Attorney-General (Cth) v The Associated Northern Collieries (1911) 14 CLR 387 The King v Boston (1923) 33 CLR 386; [1923] HCA 59 The King v Kidman (1915) 20 CLR 425; [1915] HCA 58 The Queen v Baden-Clay (2016) 258 CLR 308; [2016] HCA 35 The Queen v Hillier (2007) 228 CLR 618; [2007] HCA 13 The Queen v LK (2010) 241 CLR 177; [2010] HCA 17 The Queen v Quach (2010) 27 VR 310; [2010] VSCA 106 The Queen v Rogerson (1992) 174 CLR 268; [1992] HCA 25 Tripodi v The Queen (1961) 104 CLR 1; [1961] HCA 22 Trudgeon v R (1988) 39 A Crim R 252 Waterways Authority v Fitzgibbon(2005) 79 ALJR 1816; [2005] HCA 57 Western Australia v Marchesi (2005) 30 WAR 359; [2005] WASCA 133 Whitehorn v The Queen (1983) 152 CLR 657; [1983] HCA 42 Zoneff v The Queen (2000) 200 CLR 234; [2000] HCA 28 Texts Cited: Australian Law Reform Commission, Interim Report on Evidence, No 26 (AGPS, 1985) Vol 1; Vol 2, Draft Bill de Smith Woolf & Jowell, Judicial Review of Administrative Action, 5th ed (1995) Review of Commonwealth Criminal Law, Interim Report: Principles of Criminal Responsibility and Other Matters, (July 1990) Russell on Crimes 7th ed, Vol 1 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Ian Michael Macdonald (First Appellant) Edward Moses Obeid (Second Appellant) Moses Edward Obeid (Third Appellant) The Crown (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: C Parkin (First Appellant) A Francis (Second Appellant) B Walker SC / M Kalyk (Third Appellant) D Staehli SC / E Nicholson / N Wootton (Respondent)