Written jury directions that equate 'beyond reasonable doubt' with the absence of a 'reasonable possibility', without linking that possibility to the Crown's obligation to remove or eliminate it, constitute a material departure from the conventional formulation of the standard of proof. Where jury directions are given in both oral and written form, the written document will tend to swamp the oral direction in the jury room. Where a direction on the standard or onus of proof is substantially wrong, the case will generally fall within the category incapable of engaging the proviso under s 6(1) of the Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW).
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 22 later cases that cite this judgment.
6 of the 22 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.