Hargraves v The Queen

Stoten v The Queen [2011] HCA 44
Judgment date
Case number
B28/2011
B24/2011
Before
French CJ, Gummow, Hayne, Heydon, Crennan, Kiefel, Bell JJ
Catchwords

Criminal law – Trial - Directions to jury - Appellants convicted of charges arising from tax avoidance scheme - Appellants' dishonesty only issue at trial - Appellants gave evidence - Prosecution called appellants' accountant as witness - Appellants' counsel cross-examined accountant suggesting he tailored evidence to avoid own prosecution - Trial judge told jury they could evaluate credibility by considering a witness's "interest in the subject matter of the evidence" including "self-protection" - Whether misdirection causing miscarriage of justice - Whether direction deflected jury from need to be persuaded beyond reasonable doubt of appellants' guilt - Whether direction invited jury to test appellants' evidence according to appellants' interest in outcome of trial - Principles applicable to directions about evaluation of evidence.

Criminal Code (Q) – s 668E.

Files
44.rtf (49.74 KB)
44.pdf (82.28 KB)