A trial judge's summing-up that persistently rebuts defence arguments and expresses views on how factual issues should be resolved, even with repeated reminders that facts are for the jury, may constitute a miscarriage of justice warranting a new trial. In lengthy trials with many witnesses, the jury's increased dependence on the judge's rehearsal of facts heightens the risk that an unbalanced summing-up will deprive the accused of a fair trial. Broad directions attributing to all indigenous witnesses as a class a readiness to agree with leading propositions, without adequate evidentiary foundation, have the potential to disadvantage the defence and may contravene s 632(3) Criminal Code 1899 (Qld).
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 7 later cases that cite this judgment.
1 of the 7 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.