NSW Caselaw
New South Wales District Court
CITATION: R v Adrian PRESLAND [2009] NSWDC 71
HEARING DATE(S): 16/03/09, 17/03/09
JUDGMENT DATE: 18 March 2009
JURISDICTION: Criminal
JUDGMENT OF: Norrish QC DCJ
DECISION: Application for a verdict by direction declined.
CATCHWORDS: Criminal Law - verdict by direction
R v R (1998) 18 NSWLR 74 Doney v The Queen (1990) 171 CLR 27 R v Rivkin [2005] NSWCCA 7 CASES CITED: Lavender v The Queen (2005) 222 CLR 67 R v Tak Tak (1996) 14 NSWLR 226 R v JMR (1991) 57 ACR 39 R v Haas (1986) 22 ACR 299 R v Crooks and Hudson (1944) 44 SR (NSW) 398
PARTIES: Regina Adrian Presland
FILE NUMBER(S): 2008/0001007
Mr Barrett - Crown COUNSEL: Mr P Gray SC - Offender with Mr Messer
SOLICITORS: NSW DPP Alpass & Associates
JUDGMENT
On no case to answer; see transcript p 1230
1 HIS HONOUR: Adrian Presland, the accused, is on trial in respect of four counts of manslaughter particularised in the indictment presented at the commencement of this trial. These charges arise from the capsize of a yacht 'Excalibur' off the coast of New South Wales, near Seal Rocks on the mid north coast, on 16 September 2002. Four of the six crew died as a consequence.
2 Although the prosecution case is not closed, there being no further evidence to be called in the Crown case against Mr Presland, application was made on Monday and early Tuesday, 16 and 17 March 2009, for a verdict by direction on the basis that the Crown case is not capable of establishing the essential ingredients of the offences charged against the accused.
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate