Pre-recorded evidential video — interview evidence by closed circuit television — application for copy of evidential video interview — Evidence Act 2006, ss 103, 106(4B), 107(4) & 107B. In this pretrial matter the defendant sought an order that the complainant give evidence in Court from behind a screen, rather than by closed-circuit television (CCTV). The defendant also applied for a copy of the complainant's EVI to be given to his lawyer. The complainant faced a charge of indecent assault against his daughter, who would be under eight years old at the time of trial. Therefore the onus was on the defendant to show that the interests of justice required a departure from the presumption that child witnesses be allowed to give their evidence in an alternative way. The Court found that there were numerous reasons for the complainant to be allowed to give evidence by CCTV including the young age of the complainant and the likelihood that giving evidence by CCTV would allow her to give her best evidence. The defendant had not shown that CCTV evidence would jeopardise his right to a fair trial. The Court declined the application for the witness to give evidence in the court room. The Court then turned to the application for the lawyer to be given a copy of the EVI. The defendant argued that this was required in order for him to decide whether to call a child psychologist as expert witness. The Court viewed the application as problematic, given that the defendant was bailed to a remote address and would have to view the EVI via an online application, rather than in the presence of his lawyer. The Court also inferred that the application had been made because it was more convenient for defence counsel to have his own copy of the EVI. This was not a strong enough reason to show that it was in the interests of justice for the lawyer to be given a copy of the EVI, and the Court declined this application as well. Judgment Date: 16 March 2018. * * * Note: names have been changed to comply with legal requirements. * * *