R v Lamb and Thurston [2002] NSWSC 322

R v Lamb and Thurston [2002] NSWSC 322

Because the trial was at a very early stage, the Crown had not opened, the Crown no longer opposed discharge, the voir dire time would not be wasted, a new jury panel could be available by the next Monday, and the remarks in Wu v The Queen supported caution, the wiser course was to discharge the remainder of the jury. The venue application was refused because any fair trial concerns from possible contact with the deceased's family could be managed by juror screening, warnings and discharge if necessary, while moving the trial to Sydney would impose significant logistical expense and hardship on local witnesses and risk their non-attendance.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
08 April 2002
Procedural Posture
Criminal Murder Trial / Application to Discharge Jury and Change Venue During Voir Dire Before Crown Opening
Outcome
Jury discharged. Application for change of venue refused.
Legal Topics
['jury Discharge' 'trial With Eleven Jurors' 'change of Venue' 'fair Trial' 'jury Summons Notice']
['criminal Law and Procedure'] ['jury Discharge' 'trial With Eleven Jurors' 'change of Venue' 'fair Trial' 'jury Summons Notice']

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 Murder Trial / Application to Discharge Jury and Change Venue During Voir Dire Before Crown Opening

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the remaining jurors should be discharged after one juror was discharged as a distant relation of the deceased.' 'Whether the trial should continue with eleven jurors or start again with a fresh jury panel.' "Whether the venue should be changed from Tamworth to Sydney because of alleged hostility and possible contact between the deceased's family and jurors."]

Ratio Decidendi

Because the trial was at a very early stage, the Crown had not opened, the Crown no longer opposed discharge, the voir dire time would not be wasted, a new jury panel could be available by the next Monday, and the remarks in Wu v The Queen supported caution, the wiser course was to discharge the remainder of the jury. The venue application was refused because any fair trial concerns from possible contact with the deceased's family could be managed by juror screening, warnings and discharge if necessary, while moving the trial to Sydney would impose significant logistical expense and hardship on local witnesses and risk their non-attendance.

Court Disposition

Jury discharged. Application for change of venue refused.

Orders

  • ['The remainder of the jury is discharged.' 'The time for jury summons notice is reduced so that jury summonses delivered by Wednesday of the week of judgment are valid for the following Monday.' 'The application to change the venue to Sydney is refused.']