NSW Caselaw
Supreme Court New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: R v Rogers (No 5) [2019] NSWSC 687 Hearing dates: 16 May 2019 Date of orders: 16 May 2019 Decision date: 08 May 2019 Jurisdiction: Common Law Before: Lonergan J Decision: The Crown is permitted to cross-examine Olivia Hoare in respect of her evidence that is unfavourable to the Crown case regarding:
(i) her observations relevant to the issue of the accused being impaired;
(ii) the contents of the gaol call on 14 October 2016 to the effect that she openly discussed with the accused that the psychiatrist was coming and that she suggested a number of things to him in an attempt to assist her father in his meeting with Dr Allnutt; and
(iii) that she is exaggerating her evidence of the accused's mental state to assist him at the trial, given her love for him. Catchwords: EVIDENCE – cross-examination of unfavourable witness – cross-examination based on assertion that prior police statement inconsistent not permitted as prior police statement not inconsistent Legislation Cited: Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) ss 38 and 192 Cases Cited: R v Kennedy [2000] NSWCCA 487 Category: Procedural and other rulings Parties: Regina (Crown) Warren Rogers (Accused) Representation: Counsel: M Hobart SC/C Young (Crown) R Pontello (Accused)
Solicitors: NSW Director of Public Prosecutors (Crown) Ross Hill & Associates (Accused) File Number(s): 2016/2766529 Publication restriction: Nil
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