Baker v The Queen

In *Baker v The Queen*, the High Court of Australia considered an appeal by the applicant, Baker, against his conviction for murder. The central dispute concerned the admissibility of a confession made by Baker to police.

The High Court was required to determine whether the confession was obtained in circumstances that rendered it inadmissible under the common law, specifically whether it was unfairly prejudicial to the applicant or improperly obtained. This involved an examination of the voluntariness of the confession and the fairness of the police conduct during the interview.

The Court applied the principles of the common law governing the admissibility of confessions. It held that a confession will be inadmissible if it was not voluntary or if its admission would be unfair to the accused. The fairness limb requires a balancing of the probative value of the confession against its prejudicial effect. In this instance, the Court found that the confession was not voluntary and that its admission would be unfairly prejudicial to the applicant, leading to the conclusion that it should have been excluded.

Consequently, the High Court allowed the appeal, quashed the conviction, and ordered a new trial.