CRIMINAL LAW — application for trial by judge alone — where first trial ended in hung jury — jury unable to agree — where four-year delay between alleged offence and trial — desirability for finality — no issues raising community standards — some prejudicial publicity — finely balanced — where Court able to facilitate immediate listing — no suggestion of judge shopping — application granted
Quick Take
1On a contested s 132 application, no single factor need be determinative; the cumulative weight of delay, the desirability of finality after a hung jury, the accused's informed election to forego jury trial, some prejudicial publicity, and the complexity of expert evidence may together satisfy the interests of justice, even where no individual factor is particularly strong.
2The fact that a first trial ended in a hung jury, combined with a four-year delay between offence and retrial, strengthens the case for a judge-alone order by engaging the interests of finality for the accused, the deceased's family, and the community.
3Where no issue in the trial requires the application of objective community standards (s 132(5)), the factors favouring a jury trial are diminished, and the absence of any countervailing consideration favouring jury trial supports the making of the order.
