Austlii (High Court of Australia) The appellant, his brother and another were charged with murder. The appellant had driven the victim, and the others to a remote place where the fatal assault occurred. The Crown’s said the appellant did so with the purpose of enabling or aiding his brother to commit the offence of murder. There was ample evidence to support the prosecution’s case. However, the defence case was that all the appellant knew was that his brother intended to assault the victim. The appellant was therefore contending that he was guilty of manslaughter not murder. The judge instructed the jury that manslaughter was not available.
Held: ‘From one point of view it might appear that such a direction was unduly favourable to the appellant. Such an appearance, however, may be deceptive. Sometimes when there is a misdirection of law, it is risky to seek to assign the advantage of the misdirection exclusively to one party, and the disadvantage exclusively to another.’ and ‘The system of criminal justice as administered by appellate courts requires the assumption, that as a general rule, juries understand, and follow the directions they are given by trial judges. It does not involve the assumption that their decision-making is unaffected by matters of possible prejudice.’
Judges:
McHugh, Gummow, Hayne AND Callinan JJ
Citations:
[2000] HCA 15, (2000) 201 CLR 414, (2000) 170 ALR 88, (2000) 74 ALJR 676
Links:
Jurisdiction:
Australia
Cited by:
Cited – Coutts, Regina v CACD 21-Jan-2005
The defendant appealed his conviction for murder, saying that the judge should have left to the jury the alternative conviction for manslaughter. The victim had died through strangulation during a sexual assault by the defendant. He said it had not . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Crime
Updated: 30 April 2022; Ref: scu.223069