Page:HCF v The Queen.pdf/34

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

Edelman J
Steward J

30.

"The criminal trial on indictment proceeds on the assumption that jurors are true to their oath, that, in the quaint words of the ancient oath, they hearken to the evidence and that they obey the trial judge's directions. On that assumption, which I regard as fundamental to the criminal jury trial, the common law countries have staked a great deal. If it was rejected or disregarded, no one – accused, trial judge or member of the public – could have any confidence in any verdict of a criminal jury or in the criminal justice system whenever it involves a jury trial. If it was rejected or disregarded, the pursuit of justice through the jury system would be as much a charade as the show trial of any totalitarian state. Put bluntly, unless we act on the assumption that criminal juries act on the evidence and in accordance with the directions of the trial judge, there is no point in having criminal jury trials."

To similar effect, Keane JA said in R v D'Arcy of the juror's oath[1]:

"[T]he law proceeds upon the assumption that jurors may be relied upon to determine issues of guilt or innocence in accordance with their sworn oath. The administration of criminal justice necessarily depends upon the compliance by jurors with directions from the trial judge to base their verdict on the evidence given before them on the trial and to disregard information otherwise acquired."

In the State of Queensland, the juror's oath is in the following form[2]:

"You will conscientiously try the charges against the defendant (or defendants) [*or the issues on which your decision is required] and decide them according to the evidence. You will also not disclose anything about the jury's deliberations other than as allowed or required by law. So help you God."

The foregoing reflects the obligation imposed upon juries by s 50 of the Jury Act 1995 (Qld) that they must give a "true verdict, according to the evidence, on the issues to be tried". A "true verdict" is necessarily one made in accordance with the validly made directions of the trial judge[3].


  1. [2005] QCA 292 at [28] (with whom McMurdo P and Dutney J agreed) (footnote omitted).
  2. Oaths Act 1867 (Qld), s 22.
  3. R v Glennon (1992) 173 CLR 592 at 603 per Mason CJ and Toohey J.