Providing a dictionary to a jury at its request during deliberations on the meaning of 'beyond reasonable doubt' does not constitute a misdirection or usurp the jury's function, provided the trial judge has given correct directions and does not himself attempt to define the expression. The prohibition on defining 'reasonable doubt' is directed at judges, not at juries considering the meaning for themselves. However, the practice is undesirable and the question produced a 2-1 split, with the dissent holding it constituted a fundamental miscarriage.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 20 later cases that cite this judgment.
2 of the 20 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.