Page:HCF v The Queen.pdf/15

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.

Gageler CJ
Gleeson J
Jagot J

11.

"In the same way, it's important that you not get on the internet and look anybody up ... Other members of the juries that I've had have looked up people involved in the trial. They've looked up legal principles ... Don't do it. If you've got a problem, put it in a note, give it to the bailiff. He can give it to me. I can, if necessary, discuss it with [counsel] and I can give you appropriate directions.

… Don't do the things that I've urged you not to do. As I say, it's an offence at law to look up anything about the defendant. It's an offence by way of contempt of court if you look up anything about any of the witnesses or about any of the people or legal principles because I've given you clear directions about that issue so don't run the risk of that happening. I'm sorry to have gone on about it so long, but it's a real problem with–particularly with electronic searches that are available now and effects [sic] potentially the fairness of criminal trials …

Can I also say this: that if anybody on the jury lets you know that he or she has looked up anything on the internet or has spoken to their family about the case, just quietly give the bailiff a note saying there's something I want to discuss. I can get you in here and find out what's going on and I can decide how to deal with it, so if one person disobeys that direction, I hope that the others can, by dealing with it in that matter, overcome it.

There have been cases where trials have been aborted and convictions have been quashed. Retrials have been ordered because juries have made such private investigations, so don't view or visit the location where events took place. Don't consult any source, whether it's a newspaper or a dictionary or reference material or the internet or any other source of information. Don't conduct your own research on any matters of law."

The Crown then opened the case. The complainant K gave evidence. K's evidence, including cross-examination, continued from Tuesday, 13 October until the morning on Wednesday, 14 October 2020. A series of other witnesses gave evidence for the rest of 14 October 2020. On Thursday, 15 October 2020, due to problems with production of the transcript of evidence, there were discussions between the trial judge and counsel about legal issues in the absence of the jury. On Friday, 16 October 2020, these discussions continued. Thereafter, on that day, the trial judge directed acquittals on counts 8, 10, 11, 12, 13 and 23. The Crown prosecutor and counsel for the appellant then addressed the jury. The trial judge summed up to the jury, finishing the summing up before lunch on Friday, 16 October 2020, and the jury retired for deliberations.