Scenario

R v Tyndall(fictitious)

CarolTyndallandAndrewClarkewerepartnersinafashiondesignbusinessforsevenyearsuntileighteenmonthsagowhentheyhadamajorfallingout.Carolwastheprimarydesigner,whileAndrewlookedafterthemarketingandbusinessopportunities.Thefallingoutoccurred when Clarke wanted to take more of a role in the design side of the business afteranopportunityarosetodesignarangeofclothesforamid-rangefashionretailchain.Clarkesubsequently tendered for this contract on his own and wassuccessful. Tyndall was horrified by this, considering that Clarke had sacrificed quality and integrity for crass financial gain.

AndrewClarkewasfound,slumpedoverhisdesk,unconsciousandbarelybreathing,bythecleaneronthe17thofFebruarylastyear.Therewasaglassontherighthandsideofthedeskwith a nearly empty bottle of bourbon next to it. Forensic testing of the glass and thebottleshowedtracesofaprescription-onlytranquilisersufficienttoinduceanoverdoseinanaveragesized adult male. Clarke remained in a coma for approximately six weeks and hassufferedbraindamageaffectinghismobility,speechandcognitivefunctioning.Hewillrequiretwenty-fourhourcarefortherestofhislifeandhiscommunicationabilitiesaresubstantiallyimpaired.

TheinteriorofClarke'sofficeandstudiowereinashambleswhenambulanceofficersandthepolicearrived.Anemptybleachbottlewasfoundnexttotherackoffabrics,whichwerecoveredinobviousbleachmarksmakingthefabricworthless.Completedandnear-completedgarmentshadbeencuttoshredsandscatteredaboutthefloor.Inkpotsusedtocoloursketcheddesignshadbeenspilledalloverdesignsthatwerenowvirtuallyunrecognisable.

Duringtheinvestigation,policeattentionfocussedonTyndallasthepossibleperpetratoroftheattemptonClarke'slife.AkeypartofthereasoningforthisisevidenceviaawitnessstatementfromBillSmall,apart-timecleanerinthebuildingadjacenttothatofClarke'sofficeandstudio.SmallstatedthathesawawomancompletelydressedinblackandpullingwhatappearedtobeahoodorbalaclavaoffherheadexitthebuildinginwhichClarke'sofficeandstudiowerelocatedthroughasingledoorintoa rearlanewaywhereSmallwasloadingaskipbinwithrubbish.Smallstatesthattheheonlysawthispersonfrombehindanddidnotseetheirfaceexceptforaverybriefglimpse,butthattheclotheswornwereclosefittingandtheperson'sphysiqueandstaturewereclearlythatofawoman.Furthermore,Smallstatedthatasthewomanremovedthehood,hesawlong,curly,redhairfalldowntothemiddleofherback(thebriefglimpseSmallhadoftheperson'sfacewasatthispoint,asthepersonshooktheirhairfromthe hood orbalaclava). Smalland a policeofficer assigned toinvestigate thecase observedCCTVfootageofallpersonsenteringthebuildinginwhichClarke'sofficeandstudioarelocatedforafull24hourperiod before and after Clarke was found.Nowomanwithlong,curly,redhairwasidentified.Thedefendant,Tyndall,hasshort,curlyredhair,butitisknownthatshehadhercutshortpriortothe trial and this is notdisputed.

TyndallisontrialinrelationtotwochargesundertheCrimesAct1900(NSW)asfollows:

Section27ActsdonetothepersonwithintenttomurderWhosoever:

administersto,orcausestobetakenby,anypersonanypoison,orotherdestructivething,or

byanymeanswounds,orcausesgrievousbodilyharmtoany person,

with intent in any such case to commitmurder, shallbeliableto imprisonmentfor25years.

Section195Destroyingordamagingproperty

1. Apersonwhointentionallyorrecklesslydestroysordamagespropertybelongingtoanotherortothatpersonandanotherisliable:
   1. toimprisonmentfor5years,or
   2. ifthedestructionordamageiscausedbymeansoffireorexplosives,toimprisonment for 10years.

The Issues

The admissibility of the following evidence is listed for a pre-trial hearing before Brennan J in accordance with section 192A of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW)

1. Small'stestimonial evidence abouttheidentityof thewomanhesaw exitingthebuildingviathelanewayat Clarke'soffice andstudio
2. ExpertevidencefromMichaelDudley, Consulting Psychologist,whohasbeencalledbytheprosecutiontotestifyaboutthestateoftheofficeandstudiowhenClarkewasfound,andthelikelystateofmindofthepersonresponsible.Dudleyhasviewedphotographsandatwominutevisualrecordingmadeoftheofficeandstudioarea taken immediately after Clarke's body was foundandhasbasedhis evidenceonthese documents.
3. Tendency evidence againstTyndall,forwhichtheprosecutionhasgivennoticeofintentto adduce.Theprosecution seekstoadduce evidenceof thefollowingincidents:
   • Whileat Design College,Tyndall wasaccusedofacademicmisconductinthatsheshreddedwithscissorsthedesignsofthefront-running

studentimmediatelypriortothefinalfashionparadeoftheyear,atwhichstudentswerebeing assessedona substantive year-long designproject. Prior to this assessment Tyndall was ranked 3^rd in the class for performance. Shedidnotcontesttheallegationsandafindingwasenteredagainsther.

1. At a party shortly after Clarke and Tyndall's partnership inthebusinessbrokeup,Tyndall hada violentoutburst after consuming several glassesofsparklingwinewhere shesprayeda bottleof sparklingred wineover a displayof designerclothingonthreemannequinsinthefoyerofthehomewherethepartywasheld. Other witnesses will testify that she described the clothing as "crass commercial junk" at the time.
2. Testimonial evidencefroma waitress,JillMasters, who worksat therestaurant'TheClub'. Masters has been calledby thedefenceto testify that she saw Clarkehavingdinner witha woman with whomhe hadan argumentin thepresence of Mastersandotherpatronsattherestauranton16thFebruarylastyear(otherstaffwereinthekitchenat thetimeand althoughthyheard partsof theargument, they didnotseethepersons arguing). Masters cannotidentifythewoman,butit wasnot TyndallorClarke'swife, asphotographsof bothhave been showntoher.Masterswill relatecontentsoftheinterchangebetweenClarkeandtheunidentifiedwomanasfollows:

Clarke: I'vehadenoughofthis.Mycareerisfinallytakingoffandifyoudon'twanttobeapartofit,youcangetlost!

Woman: Allyou everthinkaboutisyour career!Whataboutme?I alreadyplaysecondfiddletotheotherwomeninyourlife!IwishI'dnevergotteninvolvedwithyou!Iwishyouweredeadandgone!

Instructions

You are the Associate to Brennan J before whom this matter is listed for hearing. Her Honour has asked you to prepare an advice as to the admissibility of the four items of evidence detailed above. If you consider that further information is required to answer any part of the task you should identify what is required and what effect it could have on your advice.

In your advice you should refer to the relevant provisions of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) and any relevant cases. You should focus on issues we have covered in weeks 1 - 10. You may raise arguments based on ss 135 - 138 of the Act but this should not be the main focus of your argument. Issues of Criminal Law are not to be addressed except as necessary to identify facts in issue in the proceeding, or otherwise impact on admissibility.