Criminal law – Criminal liability – Where respondent's wife disappeared and body later found – Where respondent involved in sexual affair with another woman – Where some injuries to respondent's cheek likely caused by fingernails – Where respondent gave evidence at trial denying involvement in killing wife and disposing of body – Where jury convicted respondent of murder – Where Court of Appeal held hypothesis of unintentional killing not excluded by prosecution and substituted verdict of manslaughter – Where common ground on appeal that respondent killed his wife – Whether hypothesis consistent with innocence of murder open – Whether jury's verdict unreasonable – Whether jury entitled to be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that respondent acted with intent to kill or cause grievous bodily harm when he killed his wife.
Words and phrases – "circumstantial evidence", "hypothesis consistent with innocence", "intention", "intractably neutral", "lies", "motive", "post-offence conduct", "role of the jury", "unreasonable verdict", "whole of the evidence".
Criminal Code (Q) – s 668E(1).
Judgment date
Case number
B33/2016
Before
French CJ, Kiefel, Bell, Keane, Gordon JJ
Catchwords