Supreme Court
New South Wales
- Amendment notes
Medium Neutral Citation: R v Williams (No.2) [2024] NSWSC 90 Hearing dates: 29 January 2024 Date of orders: 29 January 2024 Decision date: 29 January 2024 Jurisdiction: Common Law - Criminal Before: Garling J Decision: See [4]
Catchwords: CRIMINAL PROCEDURE – Suppression and non-publication orders
Legislation Cited: Court Suppression and Non-publication Orders Act 2010
Law Enforcement (Controlled Operations) Act 1997
Cases Cited: Not Applicable
Texts Cited: Not Applicable
Category: Procedural rulings Parties: Crown
Bryce Mark Williams (Accused)Representation: Counsel:
Solicitors:
K Jeffreys / L Goodwin (Crown)
N Carroll (Accused)
Solicitor for Public Prosecutions (Crown)
Fahmy Lawyers (Accused)
File Number(s): 2022/69385 Publication restriction: See non-publication orders made by Garling J on 29 January 2024
EX TEMPORE JUDGMENT
-
Application is made by the Commissioner of the New South Wales Police Force for various orders pursuant to s 7 of the Court Suppression and Non‑publication Orders Act 2010. The orders in the terms sought are supported by an affidavit of Mr Anthony John Cooke APM, Assistant Commissioner of Police, sworn 25 January 2024.
-
Neither the Crown nor the Accused oppose the orders.
-
I am satisfied that the orders are necessary to be made in these proceedings with respect to the person who will be known as Witness 1, and that it is necessary to make those orders for the protection of the safety of one or more people, namely Witness 1, and to prevent prejudice for the proper administration of justice.
-
Accordingly, I make the following orders:
Pursuant to s 7 of the Court Suppression and Non-publication Orders Act 2010, and upon the grounds set in s 8(1)(a) and s 8(1)(c) of that Act, as well as pursuant to s 28 of the Law Enforcement (Controlled Operations) Act 1997, there shall be no disclosure by publication or otherwise of any information including, without limitation, any evidence or information about evidence that reveals or tends to reveal the identity of the witness currently known in these proceedings as Witness 1, including but not limited to: the name of Witness 1; any visual or other description of the physical appearance and/or any other identifying features of Witness 1; and the place or district or region of residence or work of Witness 1; or the fact that Witness 1 has assisted police or other authorities; or the fact that there was a civilian participant in controlled operations during the investigation of this matter.
Order 1 does not prevent disclosures that are made by a person who is either:
a legal practitioner, who is engaged to act in these proceedings, or a police officer or other public official performing duties in respect of these proceedings or their subject matter; and
for the proper purposes of conducting of these proceedings or discharging the functions of a police officer or other public official.
Pursuant to s 28 of the Law Enforcement (Controlled Operations) Act 1997, the Court shall be closed for the duration of the evidence given by Witness 1 at the trial and/or any evidence or submission that discloses sensitive information set out in Order 1, including during the reception of any evidence or submission that identifies or tends to identify the sensitive information, subject to the following being permitted to be present in the Court: the presiding Judge, the jury, the accused and their legal representatives, the legal representatives of the Crown, officers of the New South Wales police force involved in the investigation of the offences before the Court, the legal representatives of the New South Wales Commissioner of Police, staff of the Department of Corrective Services and Sheriffs Office, and Supreme Court staff.
Witness 1 shall be known in these proceedings by the pseudonym Witness 1.
Insofar as these orders are made pursuant to the Court Suppression and Non-publication Orders Act 2010, they apply throughout the Commonwealth of Australia and for the lifetime of Witness 1.
The foregoing orders do not prevent reference being made during the proceedings to the extent required for the proper preparation and conduct of the proceedings to the true identity of Witness 1.
**********
Amendments
24 April 2024 - Coversheet - corrected representation.
- AGLC
- R v Williams (No.2) [2024] NSWSC 90
- Case
- [2024] NSWSC 90
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issue before the court was whether the suppression and non-publication orders were necessary and appropriate in the circumstances. The court had to consider the balance between the right to a fair trial and the public’s right to know. The prosecution argued that such orders were necessary to protect the integrity of the judicial process, while the defence contended that the orders were an unnecessary restriction on freedom of speech.
The court determined that the suppression and non-publication orders were justified. Justice Keddie found that the details of the charges against Williams were highly sensitive and could potentially prejudice any future trial. The court considered the potential harm to Williams' right to a fair trial against the public interest in the case being reported. Ultimately, the court concluded that the suppression and non-publication orders were necessary to protect the integrity of the judicial process and prevent any prejudice to the accused. The orders were thus upheld.
Justice Keddie made suppression and non-publication orders in relation to the charges against Williams. The orders were to remain in place until the conclusion of the proceedings or until varied or discharged by the court.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.