R v Ronald Edward Medich (No. 31) [2018] NSWSC 248

R v Ronald Edward Medich (No. 31) [2018] NSWSC 248

The application to discharge the jury was refused because the judge determined the immediate and clear judicial direction to ignore the prejudicial outburst was sufficient to remove risk of unfairness, consistent with established authority that juries are presumed to follow judicial instructions and that discharge is only necessary if no other remedy suffices.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
01 March 2018
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Interlocutory Application for Discharge of Jury
Outcome
Application to discharge the jury refused.
Legal Topics
['jury Discharge' 'prejudicial Evidence' 'judicial Directions']
['criminal Law' 'procedure'] ['jury Discharge' 'prejudicial Evidence' 'judicial 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

Criminal / Interlocutory Application for Discharge of Jury

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the jury should be discharged due to a prejudicial outburst by a witness']

Ratio Decidendi

The application to discharge the jury was refused because the judge determined the immediate and clear judicial direction to ignore the prejudicial outburst was sufficient to remove risk of unfairness, consistent with established authority that juries are presumed to follow judicial instructions and that discharge is only necessary if no other remedy suffices.

Court Disposition

Application to discharge the jury refused.

Orders

  • ['The application to discharge the jury is refused.']