Core Defence Lawyers - Criminal Defence Lawyers Sydney

PRIMARY PILLAR

Criminal Evidence in NSW: How Police Build Cases and How Defence Lawyers Test Them

This pillar examines the evidence types that form the foundation of most NSW criminal prosecutions. Each page analyses how police rely on the evidence, identifies common weaknesses, explains how courts assess reliability, and references applicable Evidence Act provisions.

The CORE Defence Evidence Continuum

Not all evidence is equal in reliability or probative value. CORE Defence Lawyers applies the Evidence Continuum framework to position each piece of prosecution evidence according to its objective reliability and interpretive requirements.

At one end of the continuum sits evidence that speaks for itself (e.g., clear CCTV of the defendant committing the charged act). At the other end sits evidence requiring substantial interpretation (e.g., ambiguous text messages, partial BWV footage, or uncorroborated oral accounts).

View the Evidence Continuum Framework

Body-Worn Video Evidence

How NSW Police use BWV, authentication requirements, common limitations, and defence approaches to challenging or contextualising BWV footage.

CCTV Evidence

Prosecutorial reliance on surveillance footage, quality and perspective issues, authentication under the Evidence Act, and identification limitations.

Photographic Injury Evidence

How photographs are used to prove injury, the gap between proving existence and proving causation, and medical evidence intersection.

Text Messages and Phone Data

Phone downloads, extraction methods, authentication requirements, context issues, and the interpretation of digital communications.

Witness Statements and Inconsistencies

How police obtain statements, the relationship between statements and oral evidence, and systematic approaches to identifying inconsistencies.

Admissions and Police Interviews

How police obtain admissions, ERIN requirements, sections 84-90 of the Evidence Act, voluntariness, and where confession evidence commonly fails.

Common Threads Across Evidence Types

Authentication Requirements

All evidence must be authenticated before admission. The Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) establishes requirements for proving documents, recordings, and electronic evidence. Defence practitioners should scrutinise chain of custody and authentication methodology.

Completeness and Context

Prosecution evidence often presents a partial picture. BWV may start after the relevant conduct; text messages may lack surrounding context; photographs capture a moment without narrative. Defence analysis examines what is absent as well as what is present.

Reliability vs Weight

Evidence may be technically admissible but warrant limited weight. Courts distinguish between threshold admissibility and ultimate probative value. Defence submissions should address both levels of analysis.

Corroboration and Independence

Courts consider whether evidence derives from independent sources or represents the same account in different forms. A complainant's 000 call and statement to police are not independent corroboration—they are the same source twice.

CORE Defence Lawyers' Approach

From our Parramatta base, CORE Defence Lawyers regularly reviews prosecution briefs containing the full range of evidence types analysed in this pillar. Our systematic approach involves:

  1. Comprehensive review of all disclosure material
  2. Positioning evidence on the Evidence Continuum
  3. Identifying authentication and admissibility issues
  4. Mapping evidence to elements of the offence
  5. Assessing consistency across evidence sources
  6. Developing cross-examination and submission strategies