R v.

Ricardo Francis Herman Da Silva [2016] NSWSC 763

In this case, Amanda Carter, 46, a high school maths teacher was dead due to multiple blunt
force trauma after her daughter found her body in the bedroom of their home. This had led to
the arrest of the accused who was a former real estate agent from the Lake Macquarie suburb
of Bonnells Bay. The accused and deceased had a relationship, however broke up months
before her death.

On 24 May 2016, Da Silva applied to adjourn the hearing until 2 June 2016. The application
was made due to an evidence taken from the computer used by the deceased. In that evidence
contained computer records which showed that the deceased was actively involved in both
successful and unsuccessful attempts to meet men by utilising online dating sites and adult
websites such as RSVP and Adult Friend Finder. Some of the men she met through the dating
sites was called as witnesses and was investigated by the police, while others were remained
unidentified. Other than the computer used by the deceased, evidence that was tendered to the
court includes conversations between the deceased and some of the men she found on the online
dating website.

The Crown contended that the investigating police officer had not exhaustively gathered and
analysed the entirety of the deceased’s computer records as it is possible that the deceased
would have conversed with other man using the computer, even though the existence of these
men and their identity were unidentified. Da Silva then had appointed a qualified computer
expert in order to gain access to the deceased’s computer to analysed whether there is a
possibility that the deceased had communicated with any other man than those had been called
as witnesses. Since Da Silva had appointed a computer expert, he applied for an adjournment
as the analysis cannot be completed before 2 June 2016

The court rejected the adjournment application by Da Silva based on few reasons. Among the
reasons on court refusal to adjourn the trial was because of the computer evidence. There is no
need for them to appoint a computer expert to examine the records completely. The likelihood
that the deceased has been killed by the person she met on the dating sites was in doubt. There
were no evidences available to propose that a more detailed examination by an expert would
likely to produce a different result. As there are conversations on the dating sites shows that
the deceased engaged in electronic conversations with any men in a polite and friendly manner,
there was no sign of provocation found in the conversations. The deceased also was cautious
by not reveal her identity and residential address to the men he had conversed.