R v Cranston (No 27) [2023] NSWSC 200

R v Cranston (No 27) [2023] NSWSC 200

Juror P had accepted new employment conditional on attending month-long training commencing on 7 March 2023, had resigned from prior employment after being told the trial would likely conclude by 31 January 2023, and would become unemployed if not discharged. Requiring him to continue would likely distract him and make him resentful, affecting his ability to perform the functions of a juror under s 53B(d). Because the jury had been deliberating since 18 January 2023 in a trial commenced almost a year earlier, the parties unanimously submitted that the trial should continue, and there was no risk of a miscarriage of justice, the trial should continue with ten jurors under s 53C(1)(b). The...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
09 March 2023
Procedural Posture
Common Law Criminal Procedural Ruling in a Trial of Five Accused on Two Counts Each / Jury Deliberations; Application Concerning Discharge of an Individual Juror and Direction to Jury About Separate Verdicts
Outcome
Juror 02964979 discharged; trial ordered to continue with ten jurors; jury given a direction that separate verdicts may be delivered for any accused or count if the jury wishes.
Legal Topics
['jury Discharge' 'continuation of Trial With Reduced Jury' 'separate Verdicts in Multi Accused Trial' 'jury Directions']
['criminal Procedure'] ['jury Discharge' 'continuation of Trial With Reduced Jury' 'separate Verdicts in Multi Accused Trial' 'jury Directions']

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

Common Law Criminal Procedural Ruling in a Trial of Five Accused on Two Counts Each / Jury Deliberations; Application Concerning Discharge of an Individual Juror and Direction to Jury About Separate Verdicts

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether individual Juror 02964979 should be discharged under s 53B(d) of the Jury Act 1977 (NSW) because employment training was a precondition to a new job and non-attendance would leave the juror unemployed.' 'Whether the trial should continue with the remaining ten jurors under s 53C(1)(b) of the Jury Act 1977 (NSW).' 'Whether the jury should be directed that it may deliver separate verdicts on any count against any accused at any time if it wishes to do so.']

Ratio Decidendi

Juror P had accepted new employment conditional on attending month-long training commencing on 7 March 2023, had resigned from prior employment after being told the trial would likely conclude by 31 January 2023, and would become unemployed if not discharged. Requiring him to continue would likely distract him and make him resentful, affecting his ability to perform the functions of a juror under s 53B(d). Because the jury had been deliberating since 18 January 2023 in a trial commenced almost a year earlier, the parties unanimously submitted that the trial should continue, and there was no risk of a miscarriage of justice, the trial should continue with ten jurors under s 53C(1)(b). The...

Court Disposition

Juror 02964979 discharged; trial ordered to continue with ten jurors; jury given a direction that separate verdicts may be delivered for any accused or count if the jury wishes.

Orders

  • ['That individual Juror 02964979 is discharged pursuant to s 53B(d) of the Jury Act 1977 (NSW).' 'Pursuant to s 53C(1)(b) of the Jury Act 1977 (NSW), the trial is to continue with the remaining ten jurors.' 'Jury direction at [33] given.']