A jury note that on its face reveals a fundamental misunderstanding of the burden of proof on a critical issue may constitute a miscarriage of justice even where the trial judge gave correct and emphatic directions throughout the trial, if the misunderstanding is left uncorrected and the note is read back to the jury without comment. The failure of trial counsel to seek a corrective direction does not preclude a finding of miscarriage of justice where the failure was not a deliberate tactical decision. However, the question remains contentious — the dissent held that the presumption juries follow directions was not displaced.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 5 later cases that cite this judgment.
3 of the 5 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.