R v Bloodsworth; R v Errington (No 3) [2017] NSWSC 1484

R v Bloodsworth; R v Errington (No 3) [2017] NSWSC 1484

Any unfairness from Crown's statements concerning inadmissible evidence regarding Bloodsworth can be sufficiently remedied by Crown's withdrawal of the suggestion and explicit jury direction, preserving the right to a fair trial; therefore, jury discharge is refused.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 October 2017
Procedural Posture
Criminal Trial / Application for Discharge of Jury
Outcome
Application for discharge of jury refused
Legal Topics
['jury Discharge' 'inadmissible Evidence' 'fair Trial Procedure']
['criminal Law'] ['jury Discharge' 'inadmissible Evidence' 'fair Trial Procedure']

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 / Application for Discharge of Jury

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the jury should be discharged due to prejudicial and inadmissible Crown address referring to co-accused's interview"]

Ratio Decidendi

Any unfairness from Crown's statements concerning inadmissible evidence regarding Bloodsworth can be sufficiently remedied by Crown's withdrawal of the suggestion and explicit jury direction, preserving the right to a fair trial; therefore, jury discharge is refused.

Court Disposition

Application for discharge of jury refused

Orders

  • ['Application for jury discharge refused']