Regina (C'Wealth) v Elomar & Ors [No 4] [2008] NSWSC 1444

Regina (C'Wealth) v Elomar & Ors [No 4] [2008] NSWSC 1444

The jury was not discharged because, after the judge's direction that the incidents had no connection with the accused and that no adverse inference should be drawn, and after the jurors affirmed they could act impartially, the circumstances would not cause a fair-minded and informed observer reasonably to apprehend a lack of impartiality. There was no suggestion that any accused prompted, initiated, supported or encouraged the incidents, and the judge was satisfied the jury understood and would comply with the direction.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
27 November 2008
Procedural Posture
Criminal Trial on Indictment for Conspiring to Do Acts in Preparation for a Terrorist Act or Acts / Applications by All Accused to Discharge the Jury During the Fourth Week of Trial After a Jury Note Reporting Incidents Involving a Person From the Public Gallery
Outcome
Applications to discharge the jury refused.
Legal Topics
['discharge of Jury' 'juror Impartiality' 'reasonable Apprehension of Bias' 'misconduct of a Member of the Public' 'threats to Jurors' 'judicial Directions to Jury']
['criminal Law' 'criminal Procedure'] ['discharge of Jury' 'juror Impartiality' 'reasonable Apprehension of Bias' 'misconduct of a Member of the Public' 'threats to Jurors' 'judicial Directions to Jury']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Criminal Trial on Indictment for Conspiring to Do Acts in Preparation for a Terrorist Act or Acts / Applications by All Accused to Discharge the Jury During the Fourth Week of Trial After a Jury Note Reporting Incidents Involving a Person From the Public Gallery

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the incidents reported by jurors concerning being followed and observed by a woman from the public gallery required discharge of the jury.' "Whether the trial judge's direction and the jurors' assurances were sufficient to remove any reasonable apprehension that the jury would not act impartially." 'Whether a fair-minded and informed observer would reasonably apprehend a lack of impartiality on the part of any juror.']

Ratio Decidendi

The jury was not discharged because, after the judge's direction that the incidents had no connection with the accused and that no adverse inference should be drawn, and after the jurors affirmed they could act impartially, the circumstances would not cause a fair-minded and informed observer reasonably to apprehend a lack of impartiality. There was no suggestion that any accused prompted, initiated, supported or encouraged the incidents, and the judge was satisfied the jury understood and would comply with the direction.

Court Disposition

Applications to discharge the jury refused.

Orders

  • ['I decline to order the discharge of the jury.']