R v Wayne Rodney SCHNEIDER (No 4) [2010] NSWDC 10

New South Wales District Court

CITATION: R v Wayne Rodney SCHNEIDER (No 4) [2010] NSWDC 10

HEARING DATE(S): 11 February 2010

JUDGMENT DATE: 11 February 2010

JURISDICTION: District Court Criminal

JUDGMENT OF: Berman SC DCJ

DECISION: Evidence to be admitted

CATCHWORDS: CRIMINAL LAW - Judgment - Admissibility of evidence - Consciousness of guilt - Tattoos altered after date of offence

PARTIES: The Crown Wayne Rodney Schneider

FILE NUMBER(S): DC 2009/8191

COUNSEL: Ms T Smith - Crown Mr Heliotis QC, Mr A Djemal - Defendant

SOLICITORS: Director of Public Prosecutions Galloways - Defendant

JUDGMENT

1 HIS HONOUR: The final ruling I need to make before the trial can commence before a jury, concerns the admissibility of some evidence to the effect that the accused has changed the tattoos he had on his arms after 11 February 2006. The Crown wishes to rely on that evidence as demonstrating a consciousness of guilt, the Crown suggesting that the jury are entitled to find that the accused changed his tattoos because he knew that he was guilty of the crime and because he knew that his lower arms were exposed at the time he committed the crime.

2 Evidence was called today from the tattooist who altered the accused's tattoos. If accepted that would tend to suggest that the plan to change them had been in place before the offence. Thus if accepted that consciousness of guilt submission falls away completely. However, it is not for me to decide whether Mr Davies was telling the truth or whether Mr Davies was accurate or not. That is, if the evidence is admitted, a matter for the jury. However I will simply say at this stage that it does appear that if Mr Davies comes up to proof there will be no harm (beyond possible prejudice of course) to the accused at all through the admission of the evidence because he will have a complete explanation for the change in tattoos. But of course the probative value of the evidence is obvious. The accused was, according to video footage, in a short sleeved shirt. The accused would not have known what descriptions were given of the tattoos by witnesses and so the jury could conclude that his actions in changing the tattoos after the offence resulted from a consciousness of guilt.