R v Botrus (No 3) [2020] NSWSC 1448

R v Botrus (No 3) [2020] NSWSC 1448

Although the sisters' intermittent laughter during the ERISP was prejudicial, the broader inferences advanced by the accused lacked a proper foundation. The conduct was limited, aberrant and intermittent, not all jurors appeared to have been aware of it, the jury remained attentive, and the prejudice was not of a kind vividly etched in the jury's mind or incapable of cure. An immediate direction requiring the jury to disregard courtroom reactions and decide only on the evidence was sufficient to remedy any unfairness and prevent a miscarriage of justice, so discharge of the whole jury was not required.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 October 2020
Procedural Posture
Criminal Trial for Murder Contrary to S 18(1)(a) of the Crimes Act 1900 (nsw) / Application by the Accused to Discharge the Whole Jury During Trial
Outcome
Application to discharge the whole jury dismissed.
Legal Topics
['discharge of Jury' 'jury Directions' 'prejudice' 'murder Trial' 'electronic Record of Interview']
['criminal Law' 'evidence' 'criminal Procedure'] ['discharge of Jury' 'jury Directions' 'prejudice' 'murder Trial' 'electronic Record of Interview']

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 for Murder Contrary to S 18(1)(a) of the Crimes Act 1900 (nsw) / Application by the Accused to Discharge the Whole Jury During Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the conduct of the accused's sisters laughing during the playing of the ERISP created prejudice requiring discharge of the whole jury." 'Whether any prejudice arising from the conduct could be cured by an immediate direction to the jury.' 'Whether the jury could be expected to put the courtroom reactions out of mind and decide the case only on the evidence.']

Ratio Decidendi

Although the sisters' intermittent laughter during the ERISP was prejudicial, the broader inferences advanced by the accused lacked a proper foundation. The conduct was limited, aberrant and intermittent, not all jurors appeared to have been aware of it, the jury remained attentive, and the prejudice was not of a kind vividly etched in the jury's mind or incapable of cure. An immediate direction requiring the jury to disregard courtroom reactions and decide only on the evidence was sufficient to remedy any unfairness and prevent a miscarriage of justice, so discharge of the whole jury was not required.

Court Disposition

Application to discharge the whole jury dismissed.

Orders

  • ['The application to discharge the whole jury is dismissed.']