NSW Caselaw
Supreme Court New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: R v Hawat (No 3) [2019] NSWSC 1701 Hearing dates: 26 November 2019 Date of orders: 28 November 2019 Decision date: 09 December 2019 Jurisdiction: Common Law Before: N Adams J Decision: The recording of the accused and his wife at Bankstown police station is admissible. Catchwords: CRIME – evidence – murder – joint criminal enterprise – accessory before the fact – listening device material – admissions – s 90 Evidence Act – discretion to exclude admission – recording of conversation between accused and wife at police station – whether impropriety – whether unfairness to the accused Legislation Cited: Evidence Act 1995 (NSW), s 90, s 138 Cases Cited: Em v The Queen (2007) 232 CLR 67; [2007] HCA 46 Gedeon v The Queen (2013) 237 A Crim R 326; [2013] NSWCCA 257 Hawat (No 2) [2019] NSWSC 1691 R v Sotheren [2001] NSWSC 20 R v Swaffield; Pavic v The Queen (1998) 192 CLR 159; [1998] HCA 1 R v Taleb [2019] NSWSC 241 R v Tarantino (No 6) [2019] NSWSC 1174 Robinson v Woolworths Ltd (2005) 158 A Crim R 546; [2005] NSWCCA 426 Category: Procedural and other rulings Parties: Regina (Crown) Osama Hawat (Accused) Representation: Counsel: Mr T McCarthy (Crown) Mr J Kelly SC (Accused)
Solicitors: Solicitor for Public Prosecutions (Crown) Dib & Associates Lawyers (Accused) File Number(s): 2017/194590
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