R v Jones & Ors (No3) [2007] NSWSC 771

New South Wales Supreme Court

CITATION : R v Jones & Ors (No3) [2007] NSWSC 771

JUDGMENT DATE : 3 April 2007

JUDGMENT OF : Buddin J

DECISION : Objection overruled.

CATCHWORDS : Objection to cross-examination of Crown witness upon her antecedent conduct

LEGISLATION CITED : Evidence Act

Regina Adam Jones PARTIES : Samuel Jones Elizabeth Jean Jones Lydia Jones Adam Samuel Jones

FILE NUMBER(S) : SC 2006/2009; 2006/2010; 2006/2011; 2006/2012; 2006/2007

J Pickering (Crown) D Price (Adam Jones) (Accused) COUNSEL : D Stewart (Samuel Jones) (Accused) G Whitehead (Elizabeth Jones) (Accused) C Watson (Lydia Jones) (Accused) W Terracini SC/J Trevallion (Adam Samuel Jones) (Accused)

S Kavanagh (Solicitor for Director of Public Prosecutions) Conaghan Hunter P/L (Adam Jones) SOLICITORS : Ross Hill & Co (Samuel Jones) Neil J O'Connor & Associates (Elizabeth Jones) Ian Rolfe Solicitor (Lydia Jones) Adamson Solicitors (Adam Samuel Jones)

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES COMMON LAW DIVISION

BUDDIN J

TUESDAY 3 APRIL 2007

2006/2009 - Regina v Adam JONES 2006/2010 - Regina v Samuel JONES 2006/2011 - Regina v Elizabeth Jean JONES 2006/2012 - Regina v Lydia JONES 2006/2007 - Regina v Adam Samuel JONES

JUDGMENT – (No 3) Objection to cross-examination of Carolyn Smith upon aspects of her antecedent conduct 1 His Honour: I have previously ruled that the witness may be cross-examined upon aspects of her antecedent conduct. These are my reasons for so ruling. 2 Carolyn Smith has given evidence of having witnessed critical parts of the events which culminated in the death of her brother-in-law, William Smith. She has implicated Adam Jones Snr, Adam Jones Jnr and Elizabeth Jones as having participated in the attack upon him. She has also given evidence in which she denied seeing any members of her family armed with weapons at the time of the incident. 3 I am informed that in the Local Court at Temora in 1995 the witness was convicted and placed on a good behaviour bond in respect of offences of stealing and obtaining property by deception. I have been provided with the fact sheet which was tendered to the court when the witness pleaded guilty. It is unnecessary to refer to the fine detail of that material. The deception arose in relation to the negotiation of a cheque. 4 I have also been informed that the witness was interviewed by police in Victoria in 1996 about the alleged theft of two cheques, which together were worth in excess of $20,000, from a disabled man. The monies were alleged to have been received by the witness. She denied knowing that the money was stolen and was apparently released without charge. Although she was unemployed at the time she was unable however to explain how she came to be in possession of such large sums of money. 5 I should note that Ms Smith also gave the following evidence: Q. Have you ever had problems in a caravan park in Yarrawonga in Victoria? A. I can't remember. Not that I know of.