Where the Crown relies on similarities between events across multiple counts to prove an accused's involvement in an ongoing criminal enterprise, this does not constitute coincidence reasoning under s 98 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) provided the Crown does not rely on the improbability of the similarities occurring coincidentally. The distinction turns on whether the similarities are used to prove the existence of the enterprise itself (permissible circumstantial reasoning) or to reason from the improbability of coincidence to guilt (impermissible without compliance with Part 3.6). A total effective sentence of 33 years with a 22-year non-parole period was upheld for drug importation involving approximately 125kg of cocaine over six occasions and $6 million in proceeds of crime.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 5 later cases that cite this judgment.
2 of the 5 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.