R v Mackie (No 2) [2018] NSWSC 1654

R v Mackie (No 2) [2018] NSWSC 1654

The application was refused because the accused did not persuade the Court that a judge-alone trial was in the interests of justice. The case did not involve complex expert evidence, and the central issues concerned the credibility and reliability of statements by the accused to an undercover operative, which were more consistently with the interests of justice determined by a jury of twelve than by a sole judge, notwithstanding the earlier hung jury and the availability of reasons in a judge-alone trial.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
31 October 2018
Procedural Posture
Criminal Procedure Application for Trial by Judge Alone in Murder Proceedings / Application by the Accused Under S 132(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (nsw) Before Listed Retrial
Outcome
Application refused.
Legal Topics
['trial by Judge Alone' 'interests of Justice' 'hung Jury' 'murder Trial' 'jury Trial']
['criminal Law' 'criminal Procedure'] ['trial by Judge Alone' 'interests of Justice' 'hung Jury' 'murder Trial' 'jury Trial']

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 Procedure Application for Trial by Judge Alone in Murder Proceedings / Application by the Accused Under S 132(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (nsw) Before Listed Retrial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether, where the prosecutor did not consent, it was in the interests of justice under s 132(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW) to order that the accused be tried by a Judge alone.' "Whether the previous jury's inability to reach a verdict, the accused's time bail refused, the desire for reasons, and the absence of issues requiring objective community standards justified a judge-alone trial."]

Ratio Decidendi

The application was refused because the accused did not persuade the Court that a judge-alone trial was in the interests of justice. The case did not involve complex expert evidence, and the central issues concerned the credibility and reliability of statements by the accused to an undercover operative, which were more consistently with the interests of justice determined by a jury of twelve than by a sole judge, notwithstanding the earlier hung jury and the availability of reasons in a judge-alone trial.

Court Disposition

Application refused.

Orders

  • ['The application for a trial by Judge alone is refused.']