R v Clark [No 2] [2008] NSWSC 821

R v Clark [No 2] [2008] NSWSC 821

The Court was satisfied that the juror ultimately disclosed what he knew, that the conversation known to the Court concerned the history of the trial rather than prejudicial material about the accused, and that any suggestion of further prejudicial information was speculative. There was therefore no basis to discharge either the jury or the particular juror.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
27 March 2008
Procedural Posture
Criminal Proceedings for Murder / Application to Discharge Juror and Jury During Trial
Outcome
Application for discharge refused.
Legal Topics
['jury Discharge' 'juror Misconduct' 'previous Trial' 'hung Jury' 'potential Prejudice']

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 Proceedings for Murder / Application to Discharge Juror and Jury During Trial

  1. 1 ['Whether the jury should be discharged because a juror had discussed information that the accused had previously been tried.' 'Whether the particular juror should be discharged because he may have withheld prejudicial information.' 'Whether, if the juror were discharged, the trial should proceed with a reduced jury panel.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Court was satisfied that the juror ultimately disclosed what he knew, that the conversation known to the Court concerned the history of the trial rather than prejudicial material about the accused, and that any suggestion of further prejudicial information was speculative. There was therefore no basis to discharge either the jury or the particular juror.

Court Disposition

Application for discharge refused.

Orders

  • ['The application to discharge the jury was refused.' 'The application to discharge the particular juror was refused.']