Attwood v The Queen [1960] HCA 15

Attwood v The Queen [1960] HCA 15

The words "bad character" in s. 399(e) do not exclude cross-examination about facts, matters or circumstances directly relevant to proof of the issues merely because they incidentally tell against the accused's character. Some questions asked of the applicant were tenuously connected or irrelevant and ought not to...

Source-derived case information.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Procedural Posture
Criminal Law Application for Special Leave to Appeal / Application for Special Leave to Appeal to the High Court of Australia From a Murder Conviction in the Supreme Court of Victoria
Outcome
Application for special leave to appeal refused.
Legal Topics
['cross Examination of Accused' 'bad Character Evidence' 'relevance' 'crimes Act 1958 Vict. S. 399(e)' 'special Leave to Appeal']
['criminal Law' 'evidence'] ['cross Examination of Accused' 'bad Character Evidence' 'relevance' 'crimes Act 1958 Vict. S. 399(e)' 'special Leave to Appeal']

Source-derived case record

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 Law Application for Special Leave to Appeal / Application for Special Leave to Appeal to the High Court of Australia From a Murder Conviction in the Supreme Court of Victoria

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the words "or is of bad character" in s. 399(e) of the Crimes Act 1958 Vict. exclude questions to an accused witness about matters relevant to proof of the charged crime because those matters also tend to show bad character.' 'Whether questions asked of the applicant in cross-examination were inadmissible under s. 399(e).' 'Whether any inadmissible cross-examination justified a grant of special leave to appeal.']

Ratio Decidendi

The words "bad character" in s. 399(e) do not exclude cross-examination about facts, matters or circumstances directly relevant to proof of the issues merely because they incidentally tell against the accused's character. Some questions asked of the applicant were tenuously connected or irrelevant and ought not to have been allowed, but the properly admitted evidence had great probative force and the improper questions could have no logical operation in persuading a reasonable man of guilt and were unlikely to have influenced the verdict. Special leave was therefore refused.

Court Disposition

Application for special leave to appeal refused.

Orders

  • ['Application for special leave to appeal refused.']