NSW Caselaw
District Court New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: R v Nguon & Ream [2014] NSWDC 385 Hearing dates: 28 March 2014 Decision date: 31 March 2014 Jurisdiction: Criminal Before: Judge Whitford SC Decision: Paragraphs [71], [92] and [100] Catchwords: Criminal Law – Evidence – Ad Hoc Expert - transcript of covert recordings of English language conversations – trial procedure - use of transcript as an aide memoire Legislation Cited: Evidence Act (1995) NSW, ss 79, 135, 137 and 192 Cases Cited: Butera v DPP (Vic) (1987) 164 CLR 180 Dasreef v Hawchar (2011) 243 CLR 588 Driscoll v R (1977) 137 CLR 517 Eastman v The Queen (1997) 76 FCR 9; 158 ALR 107 Gilbert v The Queen (2000) 201 CLR 414 Li v The Queen (2003) 139 A Crim R 281 R v Cassar [1999] NSWSC 436 R v Crouch (1850) 4 Cox CC 163 R v Hall [2001] NSWSC 827 R v Leung (1999) 47 NSWLR 405 R v Menzies [1982] 1 NZLR 41 R v Richard (1918) 13 Cr App R 140 Smith v the Queen (2001) 206 CLR 650 Texts Cited: Edmond, G. & San Roque, M., Quasi-justice: Ad hoc expertise and identification evidence, (2009) 33 Crim LJ 8 at 9 Category: Procedural and other rulings Parties: R v Linna Nguon; R v Peter Ream Representation: Counsel: Crown: T McDonald SC Nguon: D Yehia SC Ream: TDF Hughes
Solicitors: Office of the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions Nguon: Blair Criminal Lawyers Ream: Speirs & Associates File Number(s): 2011/3538552011/353931
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