Carr v The State of Western Australia

Criminal law – Evidence – Admissibility of videotape evidence of admissions recorded without suspect's consent – Police videotaped conversation with appellant in the lockup section of the police station – Appellant was unaware lockup conversation was being videotaped – Appellant made certain admissions – Whether lockup conversation was an "interview" within the meaning of s 570(1) of the Criminal Code (WA) ("the Code") – Relevance of formality of the lockup conversation – Whether s 570D(4) of the Code excluded, by implication, admissibility of videotape evidence of admissions recorded without suspect's consent – Relevance of assumption in s 570D(4)(c) of the Code that consent required – Difference between implication and assumption – Whether an "admission" within the meaning of s 570D of the Code included only those admissions capable of being videotaped.

Statutes – Interpretation – Purposive interpretation – Where the statutory provision reflects compromise between competing interests – Relevance of purpose or object of statute.

Words and phrases – "admissibility", "assumption", "consent", "exceptional circumstances", "formality", "implication", "interview", "right to silence".

Criminal Code (WA) – Ch LXA, ss 570(1), 570D.

Interpretation Act 1984 (WA) – s 18.