Thompson v WA

[2013] WASCA 1

Western Australia Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Criminal Law
2. › Appeals
3. › Appeal against conviction
4. › Misdirection
5. › Circumstantial evidence
6. › Direction on inferences as to guilt
7. › Whether trial judge required to direct jury in both positive and negative form
8. › Whether direction that inference of guilt must be only inference reasonably open was adequate
1. Criminal Law
2. › Sentencing
3. › Totality principle
4. › Multiple offences
5. › Whether total effective sentence bore proper relationship to overall criminality
6. › Criminal Code (WA), s 371A, s 378, s 401(1)(a)
1. Criminal Law
2. › Sentencing
3. › Cumulative and concurrent sentences
4. › One transaction rule
5. › Whether stealing of motor vehicle and aggravated burglary constituted one transaction
6. › Whether sentencing judge required to impose concurrent sentences

Quick Take

A trial judge directing a jury on circumstantial evidence inferences is not required as a matter of law to give the direction in both its positive form (if a reasonable inference consistent with innocence is open, the jury must draw it) and its negative form (the jury must not draw an inference of guilt unless it is the only inference reasonably open). The negative form alone may be adequate depending on the circumstances.