Call our lawyers
now
or,
have our lawyers
call you
Alibi Evidence (NSW)
Updated on Nov 22, 2022 • 4 min read • 491 views • Copy Link
Alibi Evidence (NSW)
An alibi is used to show that a person could not have committed an offence because they were not at the scene of the crime. Alibi evidence can be given by the accused and by other witnesses. For an alibi to succeed, the defence must be able to produce evidence that the accused was somewhere else at the time the offence was committed. Once the defence has raised an alibi, it is up to the prosecution to prove that the accused was at the scene of the crime and therefore, could have committed the offence.
Legislation in New South Wales provides for the procedures that must be followed when adducing alibi evidence.
Legislation
Under Section 150 of the Criminal Procedure Act, an accused person who is on trial on indictment (in the Supreme Court or District Court) requires leave of the court to adduce alibi evidence unless he or she has given notice to the Prosecution of the details of the alibi and filed this notice with the court at least 42 days before the start of the trial.
The notice must include the names and addresses of proposed witnesses or information that will help in finding them. If the proposed witnesses cannot be found at the address provided in the notice, the accused must immediately provide any information they have that may be of assistance in finding the person.
The requirement to give notice of alibi evidence applies only to matters on indictment. In summary matters (matters heard in the Local Court), there is no formal requirement to give notice of an alibi to the prosecution. However, it is generally considered good practice to do so. If the defence does not give notice of an alibi to the prosecution, this may result in the matter being adjourned for the prosecution to make enquiries into the alibi evidence, which will mean unnecessary delays.
When should leave be refused?
A court should not refuse an application for leave to adduce alibi evidence if it appears that the Magistrate who committed the matter did not advice the accused of the requirement to given notice of an alibi.
A court should not refuse an application for leave to adduce alibi evidence unless the introduction of alibi evidence will cause prejudice that cannot be addressed without significantly disrupting the trial.
In a case where the accused is permitted to call alibi evidence without having given notice of the alibi, the court must also consider whether the prosecution ought to be permitted to call evidence in reply.
In Killick v The Queen 1981, the High Court considered the question of whether the prosecution should be permitted to call evidence rebutting an alibi that was raised for the first time after the closure of the Crown case. In that case, a majority ruled that rebuttal evidence should not have been allowed, as the prosecution ought to have foreseen the advancement of an alibi that had been advanced at earlier procedural stages. The rule against reopening the crown case prevailed.
Burden of proof
The burden of proof continues to lie with the prosecution when an alibi has been raised. The prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the alibi evidence should be rejected. It must prove that the accused was at the scene of the crime at the time the offence was committed and that there is no reasonable possibility that they were elsewhere.
However, the fact that the prosecution establishes that the alibi evidence should be rejected does not necessarily mean that the accused should be found guilty. In order to find the accused guilty, the jury must be satisfied not only that they were at the scene of the crime, but also that they committed all the elements of the offence.
If you require legal advice or representation in a criminal law matter or in any other legal matter, please contact Go To Court Lawyers.
Related Content
Sentencing Options for Sex Offenders (NSW)
Non-Payment of Fines (NSW)
Fraud in NSW
Indictable Offences (NSW)
Aggravated Offences (NSW)
Common Assault in New South Wales (NSW)
Sexual Offences Against Adults (NSW)
Child Abuse Material Offences (NSW)
Cultivating Cannabis and the Law (NSW)
Sexual Touching in New South Wales
Drug Offences in NSW
Stealing by Finding: Is ‘Finders Keepers’ a Crime? (NSW)
Fernanda Dahlstrom
Content Editor
Fernanda Dahlstrom has a Bachelor of Laws from Latrobe University, a Graduate Diploma in Legal Practice from the College of Law, a Bachelor of Arts from the University of Melbourne and a Master of Arts (Writing and Literature) from Deakin University. Fernanda practised law for eight years, working in criminal defence, child protection and domestic violence law in the Northern Territory. She also practised in family law after moving to Brisbane in 2016.
Affordable Lawyers
Our Go To Court Lawyers will assist you in all areas of law. We specialise in providing legal advice urgently – at the time when you need it most. If you need a lawyer right now, today, we can help you – no matter where you are in Australia.How It Works
1. You speak directly to a lawyer
When you call the Go To Court Legal Hotline, you will be connected directly to a lawyer, every time.
2. Get your legal situation assessed
We determine the best way forward in your legal matter, free of charge. If you want to go ahead and book a face-to-face appointment, we will connect you with a specialist in your local area.
3. We arrange everything as needed
If you want to go ahead and book a fact-to-face appointment, we will connect you with a specialist in your local area no matter where you are and even at very short notice.
Related Law Topics
What is a Rebuttable Presumption? (Vic)
A rebuttable presumption exists where the law requires a court to presume something is the case until evidence is adduced that proves otherwise. A rebuttable presumption in criminal proceedings can favour an accused or against an accused. There are numerous rebuttable presumptions within criminal law. This page seeks to explain them ....
Posted in:
Evidence
Forensic Evidence (ACT) In the ACT police have the power to collect forensic evidence in the course of a criminal investigation. These powers are set out in the Crimes (Forensic Procedures) Act 2000. There are strict rules about when forensic material can be obtained and the procedures that must be ....
Posted in:
Evidence
Police Procedures
Child Witnesses In Criminal Matters (Tas)
Sometimes it is necessary for a child to give evidence in a criminal matter. Unfortunately, it can be traumatising for a child to testify, particularly as a victim of crime. As such, the Evidence (Children and Special Witnesses) Act 2001 offers extra support and protection to children in a court ....
Posted in:
Evidence
Child Forensic Interviews: The Queen v Brown
Child Forensic Interviews: The Queen v Brown The 2020 NT Supreme Court decision of The Queen v Brown dealt with the question of whether the content of three Child Forensic Interviews conducted in the court of an investigation of a child sex matter was admissible at trial. In that matter, ....
Posted in:
Evidence
Police Procedures
Cross-Examination (SA) Cross-examination occurs when a party in a contested proceeding questions a witness called by the other party to try to expose weaknesses in the witness’s evidence. The cross-examination of a witness occurs after the witness has completed their examination-in-chief. This page deals with cross-examination in criminal proceedings in ....
Posted in:
Evidence
Evidence is governed by various and complex rules to ensure that our courts and juries only rely on what is admissible evidence. ‘Admissible evidence’ is evidence that is capable of being received by a court or tribunal that goes towards proving a fact in issue. To be admissible, evidence must ....
Posted in:
Court Processes
Evidence
Tendency and Coincidence (Vic)
Tendency and coincidence evidence, also referred to as propensity or similar fact evidence, is evidence that an accused has a tendency to commit certain acts, based on the assertion that they have done it before, or that it is likely that an accused committed multiple acts based on the similarity ....
Posted in:
Evidence
A person who is charged with criminal offences may contest the charge and rely on a legal defence such as self-defence or duress. An accused person may also rely on a factual defence such as an alibi. An alibi exists where a person was not at the scene of the ....
Posted in:
Defences
Evidence
Voir Dires (ACT) A voir dire is a preliminary proceeding that can be held to determine whether particular evidence will be admitted at trial. A court may agree to hold this proceeding before a jury trial or contested hearing when one of the parties requests it. This page deals with ....
Posted in:
Court Processes
Evidence
The Tasmanian police interview a person when they suspect they were involved in a crime, either as an offender, victim, or witness. The purpose of this interview is to gather evidence to prosecute offenders. The police can detain a person for a reasonable time for investigation and questioning before they ....
Posted in:
Evidence
Police Procedures
In every criminal case, the prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the person charged or participated in the commission of an offence. In some cases, this requires the positive identification of the defendant as the person who committed the acts. Identification may involve an eyewitness giving evidence that ....
Posted in:
Evidence
Voir Dires in South Australia A voir dire is a pre-trial proceeding that is held to determine whether a particular piece of evidence will be admitted at trial. It is held prior to the jury trial (in a Supreme Court or District Court matter) or prior to the contested hearing (in a Magistrates Court or Children’s ....
Posted in:
Court Processes
Evidence