Criminal law ‑ Appeal against conviction ‑ Importing a commercial quantity of a border‑controlled drug ‑ Whether conviction unsafe and unsatisfactory
Quick Take
1Where the Crown confines its case at trial, for example by undertaking to prove that the accused joined the agreement by a particular date, it may be held to that confinement on an unreasonable-verdict appeal. The question then becomes whether the jury must, rather than might, have entertained a reasonable doubt on those self-imposed issues.
2For joint commission under s 11.2A of the Criminal Code (Cth), the accused need not be ad idem with every participant. It is sufficient that he was party to an agreement with some participants, here a co-offender and the overseas supplier, even if another participant believed he had been excluded.
3On the facts, the hypothesis that the accused had been displaced from the importation agreement, resting on messages between two co-offenders, was held to be fanciful. That hypothesis failed when the circumstantial evidence was assessed as a whole rather than piecemeal, including continued covert contact, meetings, and the accused's active coordinating role at the time of importation.
