- Headnote
- Posts
- Deeming v Pesutto continues today
Deeming v Pesutto continues today
Live streamed Deeming v Pesutto defamation trial continues today, throwback to judge giving jury directions using gravy ladle story, Mona wins TASC appeal
Was this email forwarded to you?
Sign up for our free daily email newsletter at headnote.com.au
Daily wrap
Editor’s picks
Live stream - September 30 2024 at 10:15 AM - Moira Deeming v John Pesutto - YouTube
Gui v Weston [2013] VSCA 364 (13 December 2013)
[41] When directing the jury as to the manner in which they ought to approach the evidentiary dispute between Mr Weston and Mrs Kesby, the trial judge distinguished between direct evidence – ‘a witness’s evidence about something that he or she saw, heard or did’, and ‘conclusions or inferences from facts which have been established by the direct evidence’. Her Honour gave several examples of inferential reasoning, and the ways in which it can be distinguished from guesswork or speculation. The first, the ‘rain example’, referred to the drawing of an inference that it had rained during the night based upon the fact that the ground and trees were wet in the morning. The rain example was given to illustrate that the conclusion was legitimate even if one had not actually seen the rain. The second, the ‘Jennifer and Brian example’, was expressed by her Honour as follows:
Let me give you another example, and it has got nothing to do with this case, this is an example from having mum over for dinner. Brian, who shared a house with Jennifer, invited his mother over for dinner. During the course of the meal Brian’s mother could not help but notice how beautiful Brian’s housemate, Jennifer, was.
Brian’s mum had long been suspicious of the true nature of the relationship between Brian and Jennifer, even though Brian and Jennifer described their relationship as purely platonic. Mum became even more curious. Over the course of the evening, while watching the two of them interact, she started to wonder whether there was something more in the relationship between Brian and Jennifer than met the eye.
Reading into his mum’s thoughts, Brian volunteered, ‘I know what you must be thinking, mum, but I assure you Jennifer and I are just housemates.’ About a week later Jennifer came to Brian saying, ‘Ever since your mother came to dinner I have been unable to find that beautiful silver gravy ladle. You don’t suppose she took it, do you?’ Brian said, ‘Well, I doubt it. But I’ll send her an email, just to be sure.’
So he sat down and wrote this email, ‘Dear Mum, I am not saying you did take the gravy ladle from the house and I am not saying you did not take the gravy ladle from the house, but the fact remains that one has been missing ever since you were here for dinner. Love, Brian.’ Several days later Brian received an email back from his mother, and it read like this, ‘Dear Son, I am not saying you do sleep with Jennifer, I am not saying you do not sleep with Jennifer, but the fact remains if Jennifer is sleeping in her own bed she would have found the gravy ladle by now. Love, Mum.’
International
Next High Court hearing (9 October). Is Migration Amendment (Aggregate Sentences) Act 2023 (Cth) an invalid usurpation of, or interference with, the judicial power of the Commonwealth, or an invalid acquisition of right to sue for false imprisonment ?
hcourt.gov.au/cases/case_s12…— Australian Constitutional Law (@ConstitLawAus)
6:57 AM • Sep 27, 2024
Like our free newsletter? The best way to support us is to tell your colleagues about our newsletter!
We welcome your feedback, which you can send to [email protected]y