Black v The Queen (1993)
 |
| Black v The Queen | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Court | High Court of Australia |
| Decided | 22 December 1993 |
| Citations | [1993] HCA 71, (1993) 179 CLR 44 |
| Case history | |
| Appealed from | NSW Court of Criminal Appeal |
| Court membership | |
| Judges sitting | Mason CJ, Brennan, Deane, Dawson, & McHugh JJ |
Black v The Queen[1] is a decision of the High Court of Australia.
In the first trial, Black was found guilty of two crimes of arson by a jury but only after the trial judge had directed the jurors make a majority decision.
On appeal to the High Court of Australia, the decision was set aside, and a new trial ordered.
The Court's finding
[edit]The majority ruling found that judge did not instruct the jury appropriately in relation to the flaws in the police interviews. They found that the trial judge should have told them to scrutinise police interviews closely.[2] It additionally found that the jury must be free to deliberate without any pressure being brought upon them.[3]
The Court quashed the conviction, set aside the decision of the New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal and ordered a new trial.
Broader applications
[edit]In Australian law, a "Black direction" is a direction by a judge to a jury to reconsider the votes of a small number of jury members.[4]
In Queensland, a judge may make a "Black direction" to a jury.[5]
See also
[edit]References
[edit]- ^ Black v The Queen [1993] HCA 71, (1993) 179 CLR 44 (22 December 1993), High Court.
- ^ Black v R, paragraph 26
- ^ "Prospect of disagreement". Criminal Trial Courts Bench Book. NSW Judicial Commission.
- ^ "Majority report". The Sydney Morning Herald. Fairfax Media. 27 July 2002. Retrieved 16 April 2015.
- ^ "Jury Failure to Agree - Benchbook – March 2017 Amendments No 54.1" (PDF). Queensland Courts. Supreme Court of Queensland. March 2017. Retrieved 14 February 2018.
 | This article related to Australian law is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it. |