Tendency Notice z5118056 PDF

Preview

Summary

Tendency Notice Online Activity for CPEP...

Description

CPEP Tendency Notice Exercise: s 97 Notice Template NOTICE: TENDENCY EVIDENCE PURSUANT TO

:

SECTION 97 OF THE EVIDENCE ACT 1995 NSW

MATTER

:

PROSECUTION of Patrick JOINER

REFERENCE

:

2023/002254

Notice is hereby given that the Prosecution presently intends to adduce evidence of “tendency” pursuant to the tendency rule in sub-section 97(1) of the Evidence Act 1995, ie. Evidence of the character, reputation or conduct of a person, or tendency that a person has or had to prove that a person has or had a tendency (whether because of the person’s character or otherwise) to act in a particular way or to have a particular state of mind.

1. The person whose “tendency” is the subject of the evidence sought to be adduced is the accused person, Mr Patrick Joiner.

2. The tendency sought to be proved is his tendency to act in a particular way, or to have a particular state of mind, namely to:

(a)

monitor the movements of female partners

(b)

violently react during minor arguments with female partners

(c)

be physically violent in reaction to non-provocative conduct by female partners

3. The activities in which the accused person, Mr Patrick Joiner, engaged which demonstrate the tendencies described in paragraph 2, above, include;

(a)

to push female partners against a wall

(b)

to push or throw female partners to the ground

(c)

to asphyxiate female partners with an object

(d)

to asphyxiate female partners with his hands

(e)

to drag female partners on the ground

(f)

to force the face or head of female partners onto the ground

(g)

to forcefully shake female partners

(h)

to pull the hair of female partners

(i)

to hit female partners on the head

4. So far as is known to the Prosecution, particulars of the date, time, place and circumstances at or in which the conduct referred to in paragraph 3 above occurred as follows. (a) Victoria Bowdler:

The ex-wife of the accused who was in a relationship with the accused from 1985 to 1992 after a prior relationship of 4 years. Whilst married there was an incident involving putting the sewing away which resulted in the accused pushing Victoria Bowdler against the wall with his hand and then a chair around her throat. After separation, there was a second incident during a visitation of their son, whereby the accused grabbed Victoria Bowdler around the arm and closed the car door on her.

(b) Belinda Speedy:

During their relationship which began in 1995 and ended at around 1996. During that period, the first incident resulted from an argument concerning sleeping arrangements, which led to the accused holding the witness around the throat with her feet of the ground, strangling her. This only stopped when her brother in law came into the room and pulled the accused of the witness. Soon after this a second incident occurred whereby the accused threw her against a golf cart and put his hands around her neck attempting to strangle her only stopping once a security guard intervened. There was a third incident which happened when the accused and the witness went camping. Believing the witness had gone outside of the tent naked the accused tore down the tent, ran after the witness and grabbed her, pushing her face to the ground. Again during the third incident it was only stopped through the intervention of 2 security guards. Once the two returned home the fourth incident occurred whereby the accused began strangling her when they were in bed together. A separate fifth incident occurred when the accused pushed the witness down the stairs, then dragged her outside and smashed her head on the driveway.

(c) Elizabeth Jennings:

During their relationship which lasted with the accused between 1996 to 1997. During that period, the first incident occurred when there was an argument about a telephone call from a male friend of the witness. Because of this the accused put his hand hands around her neck, then continuously shook her until she threatened to end the relationship. The second incident occurred over an argument about the witness going out, this resulted in the accused pulling the witness by her hair onto the sliding door railing. The third incident occurred after leaving a bar, where the accused threw the witness to the ground twice, hitting her repeatedly to the head after each time. After running to her unit, the accused ran and caught up with her where the fourth incident happened. During the fourth incident, the accused dragged her into the lift and her flat. Because of this fourth incident the witness suffered a cut mouth, a bruised right eye, and general soreness to the head.

5. In the view of the lawyer with the current conduct of the matter, the tendency evidence sought to be adduced bears upon the facts in issue in this prosecution, including the following facts in issue:

(a) Whether the accused killed his wife by assaulting her violently with the intention to either kill her or cause grievous bodily harm.

Signed: Printed Name:

Brian Chhoeung Solicitor in the employ of the Office of Public Prosecutions

Note:

Clause 5 Evidence Regulation 2005 states:

5

The tendency rule and the coincidence rule – form of notices (1) This clause is made for the purpose of section 99 of the Act. (2) A notice given under section 97(1)(a) of the Act (relating to the tendency rule) must state: (a) the substance of the evidence of the kind referred to in that subsection that the party giving the notice intends to adduce, and (b) if that evidence consists of, or includes, evidence of the conduct of a person, particulars of: (i) the date, time, place and circumstances at or in which the conduct occurred, and (ii) the name of each person who saw, heard or otherwise perceived the conduct, and (iii) in a civil proceeding – the address of each person so named, so far as they are known to the notifying party....