R v Armitage; R v Armitage

[2019] QCA 149

Queensland Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Criminal Law
2. › Appeal and new trial
3. › Verdict unreasonable or insupportable having regard to evidence
4. › Circumstantial case
5. › Whether open to jury to find intent for murder where cause of death unknown
6. › Criminal Code (Qld), ss 7, 8
1. Criminal Law
2. › Appeal and new trial
3. › Powers of court on appeal
4. › Power to substitute verdict
5. › Substitution of manslaughter for murder
6. › Whether pre-condition that every fact found by jury be known
7. › Criminal Code (Qld), s 668F(2)
1. Criminal Law
2. › Appeal and new trial
3. › Misdirection and non-direction
4. › Alternative verdict of manslaughter
5. › Whether trial judge required to direct on manslaughter as alternative to murder on basis of aiding under s 7(1)(c)
6. › Criminal Code (Qld), ss 7(1)(c), 576
1. Criminal Law
2. › Appeal and new trial
3. › Misdirection and non-direction
4. › Torture
5. › Unanimity direction
6. › Whether jury required to be unanimous as to acts constituting torture
7. › Whether proviso should be applied
8. › Criminal Code (Qld), s 668E(1A)

Quick Take

Where the cause of death is unknown in a murder prosecution, the prosecution cannot prove beyond reasonable doubt that the deceased was killed by an act done with intent to kill or cause grievous bodily harm, even where the evidence supports a finding that the deceased was killed by the infliction of violence. It is not a pre-condition to the exercise of the s 668F(2) verdict substitution power that every fact found by the jury be known; the power may be exercised where the unreasonableness of the murder verdict depends only on the absence of proof of intent, with all other elements being open to the jury to find as established. The proviso cannot be applied where the appellate court has not seen or heard the evidence and there are grounds for challenging witness credibility.