A District Court judge in New South Wales has ruled that video recordings of an online interaction involving two former nurses are inadmissible in their upcoming criminal trials.

新南威爾斯州一名地區法院法官裁定，涉及兩名前護士的網路互動錄影，在即將進行的刑事審判中不可作為證據。

The legal proceedings involve Ahmed Rashad Nadir and Sarah Abu Lebdeh, who are alleged to have utilized a carriage service to deliver menacing and offensive communications. Ms. Abu Lebdeh faces an additional charge pertaining to the threat of violence against Israeli nationals. The evidence in question originated from a February 2025 interaction on the Chatruletka platform, recorded by an Israeli content creator, Max Ilinsky (also known as Max Veifer), and subsequently disseminated to a substantial social media audience.

此法律程序涉及 Ahmed Rashad Nadir 與 Sarah Abu Lebdeh，兩人被指利用電訊服務發送威脅與冒犯性訊息。Abu Lebdeh 女士還面臨一項額外指控，涉及對以色列國民發出暴力威脅。相關證據源自 2025 年 2 月在 Chatruletka 平台的一次互動，由一名以色列內容創作者 Max Ilinsky（又名 Max Veifer）錄製，隨後在社交媒體上廣泛傳播。

The judicial determination centered on the legality of the recording under New South Wales statutes, which prohibit the unauthorized recording of private conversations. While the Crown argued that the random nature of the platform diminished the expectation of privacy, the defense contended that the recording constituted an illegal invasion of privacy. Judge Michael McHugh determined that the evidence was obtained improperly and that the desirability of its admission did not outweigh the legal irregularities of its acquisition. Consequently, the court mandated the exclusion of all video evidence from the trials.

司法裁定集中在該錄影於新南威爾斯州法令下的合法性，該法令禁止未經授權錄製私人對話。儘管控方主張該平台的隨機性質降低了對隱私的期待，但辯方認為該錄影構成了非法侵犯隱私。法官 Michael McHugh 判定該證據獲取方式不正當，且採納該證據的必要性並不足以抵銷獲取過程中的法律違規。因此，法院強制在審判中排除所有錄影證據。

Furthermore, the court acknowledged the high degree of public exposure the case had already received via legacy media and social platforms. Although Judge McHugh characterized the alleged utterances as potentially disturbing to the general public, he maintained that the determination of criminal liability remains the exclusive purview of a jury. He further clarified that the ruling does not constitute a judicial opinion on the broader geopolitical conflicts or the nature of antisemitism, noting that diverse perspectives on such matters may be asserted in good or bad faith.

此外，法院承認此案已透過傳統媒體與社交平台獲得高度公眾關注。儘管 McHugh 法官將指控中的言論描述為可能令大眾不安，但他堅持判定刑事責任仍屬於陪審團的專屬權限。他進一步澄清，此次裁定並不構成對更廣泛的地緣政治衝突或反猶太主義性質的司法意見，並指出對於此類議題的不同觀點，可能是基於善意或惡意而提出。

The defendants remain on bail pending a trial scheduled for late August, though legal counsel for the defense suggests the prosecution's case may be significantly compromised by the evidentiary exclusion.

被告目前獲准保釋，等待 8 月底的審判，但辯方律師認為，由於證據被排除，控方的指控可能會受到嚴重影響。