R v McKegg [2007] NSWDC 11

New South Wales District Court

CITATION: R v McKegg [2007] NSWDC 11

HEARING DATE(S): 20/11/06 - 22/11/06, 12/02/07, 13/02/07

JUDGMENT DATE: 14 February 2007

JURISDICTION: Criminal

JUDGMENT OF: Murrell SC DCJ

DECISION: Guilty of each count in the indictment

CATCHWORDS: Judge alone trial - Deemed supply of prohibited drug - Accused's knowledge of drug

PARTIES: Crown William John McKegg

FILE NUMBER(S): 06/11/0522

COUNSEL: Mr W Barry (Accused)

SOLICITORS: Mr D Stewart (Crown)

JUDGMENT

1 The accused elected to be tried by a judge alone and the DPP consented. I am satisfied that, before making the election, the accused sought and received advice from a barrister or solicitor in relation to the election.

2 The accused pleaded not guilty to two offences, namely that, on 19 August 2005 at Paddington, he supplied the prohibited drugs cocaine and ecstasy.

3 I set out the principles of law which I have applied and the findings of fact which I have made the purpose of arriving at verdicts.

General Principles of Law 4 I am aware that the two charges were heard together as a matter of convenience. It is my duty to consider each charge separately and return a separate verdict of guilty or not guilty on each charge.

5 I am aware that, in making findings of fact, I must rely upon the evidence, ie the evidence given by the witnesses and the evidence contained in the exhibits. I must apply my common sense.

6 I am aware that the Crown has the task of proving the accused guilty beyond reasonable doubt. In other words, the accused is presumed to be innocent of each charge unless and until the Crown proves him guilty beyond reasonable doubt in relation to that charge. Suspicion must play no part in my deliberations. If I feel that the accused may be guilty and even if I feel that he probably is guilty, as long as I have a reasonable doubt about his guilt on a particular charge, I must return a verdict of not guilty on that charge.