Special Bulletin 9 — May 2004

This Bulletin has been archived because it has been superseded and/or incorporated in the relevant section of the Bench Book

R v Bilal Skaf; R v Mohammed Skaf [2004] NSWCCA 37

Additional directions to prevent misconduct by jury

 

In R v Skaf and Skaf, the NSW Court of Criminal Appeal took the opportunity to assist trial judges by providing certain directions at the commencement of a trial or, where necessary, during the course of a trial, to avoid juror misconduct.

The Court said at [284] it would be useful to add to the directions set out in [1-520] of the Criminal Trial Courts Bench Book the following:

(a) 

they should not, either individually or as a group, make any private visit to the scene of the alleged offence, or attempt any private experiment concerning any aspect of the case, for the reason that to do so would change their role from that of impartial jurors to investigators, and lead to them taking into account material that was not properly placed before them as evidence, of which those representing the Crown and the accused would be unaware and unable to test, and which might require expertise in order to ensure that the inspection or experiment was properly conducted;

(b) 

the only circumstances in which views or experiments are permitted, and are available by way of evidence, are those which occur in the presence of all jurors, the legal representatives of the parties, and the judge, and in circumstances where safeguards are taken to replicate the conditions, which were in existence at the time of the relevant events, and/or where, if there are any relevant differences in the crime scene or in the circumstances of the experiment, they can be pointed out to the jury in the course of the evidence;

(c) 

the restriction concerning jurors making their own inquiries about any aspect of the case, inspecting the site, or carrying out experiments, extends not only to individual jurors but also requires that they do not cause or request anyone else to do any of those things;

(d) 

in the event of it becoming apparent to any juror, in the course of the trial, that a fellow juror has made some independent inquiry in relation to any aspect of the case, including making an inquiry about the accused or the background to the offence, or making a private inspection or conducting a private experiment; or has caused anyone else to do any of those things; or has discussed the case with anyone other than remaining members of the jury, then that should be brought immediately to the attention of the presiding judge;

(e) 

in the event of it becoming apparent to any juror in the course of the trial, that any matter which is not in evidence has found its way into the jury room, then that should similarly be brought to the attention of the trial judge;

(f) 

the reason why it is necessary for any such matter to be brought to the immediate attention of the judge, is that, unless it is known before the end of the trial, then it may not be possible to put matters right, with the consequence that an injustice may occur, or that it may become necessary for there to be a discharge of the jury, and a retrial directed.

Paragraph [1-520] of the Bench Book will be amended in the next update to incorporate these additional directions.