R v McNeil (No 2) [2015] NSWSC 757

R v McNeil (No 2) [2015] NSWSC 757

Although the publication of prejudicial photographs of the accused was highly undesirable and carried real potential for prejudice, the risk of impermissible prejudice could be sufficiently ameliorated by appropriate directions to the jury. There was no evidence that any juror had been exposed to the photographs, and the important legal principle is that jurors are expected to adhere to their oath and follow judicial directions. Therefore, the application to discharge the jury was refused.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
03 June 2015
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Application for Discharge of Jury During Trial
Outcome
Application to discharge jury refused
Legal Topics
['jury Discharge' 'prejudicial Publicity' 'murder Trial' '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 / Application for Discharge of Jury During Trial

  1. 1 ['Whether prejudicial media reporting and publication of photographs of the accused required discharge of the jury' 'Whether judicial directions could sufficiently ameliorate risk of impermissible prejudice to the accused']

Ratio Decidendi

Although the publication of prejudicial photographs of the accused was highly undesirable and carried real potential for prejudice, the risk of impermissible prejudice could be sufficiently ameliorated by appropriate directions to the jury. There was no evidence that any juror had been exposed to the photographs, and the important legal principle is that jurors are expected to adhere to their oath and follow judicial directions. Therefore, the application to discharge the jury was refused.

Court Disposition

Application to discharge jury refused

Orders

  • ['The application for the discharge of the jury was refused.']