R v Afu, R v Caleo (No 11) [2018] NSWSC 190

Supreme Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Afu, R v Caleo (No 11) [2018] NSWSC 190 Hearing dates: 13 February 2018 Decision date: 15 February 2018 Jurisdiction: Common Law Before: R A Hulme J Decision: Evidence excluded Catchwords: EVIDENCE – s 138 Evidence Act – whether photographic identification evidence improperly obtained – whether police did not comply with procedural requirements of commissioner of police – where identification of accused made after conclusion of video recording of photo line-up – whether irregularity was inconsistent with minimum standards expected of law enforcement – no impropriety found

EVIDENCE – s 137 Evidence Act – whether probative value of photographic identification made over twenty years after event outweighed by risk of unfair prejudice – where cross-racial identification – where witness made photographic identification confidently – where witness also made inconsistent statements as to appearance of accused – low probative value – outweighed by risk of unfair prejudice – evidence excluded Legislation Cited: Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) ss 137, 138 Cases Cited: IMM v R (2016) 257 CLR 300 Ridgeway v The Queen (1995) 184 CLR 19; [1995] HCA 66 Robinson v Woolworths Ltd (2005) 64 NSWLR 612; [2005] NSWCCA 426 Category: Procedural and other rulings Parties: Regina Alani Afu Representation: Counsel: Ms M Cunneen SC (Crown) Mr R Wilson (Accused)

Solicitors: Solicitor for Public Prosecutions Katsoolis & Co File Number(s): 2014/321700