R v Patterson (No 4) [2024] NSWSC 456

Supreme Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Patterson (No 4) [2024] NSWSC 456 Hearing dates: 17 April 2024 Date of orders: 17 April 2024 Decision date: 17 April 2024 Jurisdiction: Common Law - Criminal Before: Dhanji J Decision: Directions made as to concurrent evidence. Catchwords: CRIMINAL LAW – practice and procedure – expert evidence – three psychiatrists – evidence to be given concurrently – s 275C of the Criminal Procedure Act 1996 (NSW) – order made - reasons Legislation Cited: Criminal Procedure Act 1996 (NSW) Category: Procedural rulings Parties: Rex (Crown) Jason Patterson (Accused) Representation: Counsel: K Ratcliffe (Crown) MP King (Accused)

Solicitors: Solicitor for Public Prosecutions (NSW) (Crown) Legal Aid NSW (Accused) File Number(s): 2021/327813 Publication restriction: Nil

EXTEMPORE JUDGMENT (REVISED) 1. HIS HONOUR: In this matter there is agreement that the most efficient and effective way of calling expert evidence from the three expert witnesses is to have that evidence heard concurrently. I accept what is said by the parties with respect to the desirability of that course. Consequently I make an order pursuant to s 275C of the Criminal Procedure Act 1996 (NSW) that the following witnesses give evidence concurrently: Professor Greenberg who is to give evidence on behalf of the Crown; Dr Ellis and Dr Farrar who are to give evidence on behalf of the accused. 2. With respect to that order, I give the following directions: 1. The expert witnesses are to be sworn in immediately one after the other. Thereafter, Professor Greenberg is to give his evidence-in-chief with respect to a topic to be delineated by the Crown in the introductory questions to Professor Greenberg. While that occurs, Drs Ellis and Farrar are to be seated in an area of the courtroom behind the accused's counsel where they will be visible to the jury. 2. On conclusion of each topic on which Professor Greenberg is to be examined in-chief by the Crown, the accused is to call its experts in the order in which the accused chooses with respect to that topic. That process is to continue until the evidence-in-chief of each of the experts is completed. Thereafter, Professor Greenberg is to be cross-examined by the accused with respect to all of the evidence. 3. On conclusion of that cross-examination, Professor Greenberg is to be re-examined, if necessary, by the Crown. On conclusion of Professor Greenberg's re-examination, the defence experts will be recalled in turn to be cross-examined and, in each case, if necessary, re-examined.