Behan v The Queen

Behan v The Queen involved the applicant challenging his convictions for being knowingly concerned in the importation of a prohibited import, specifically MDMA in tablet form commonly known as Ecstasy. The case was heard in the District Court and subsequently the High Court of Australia. The applicant contested his convictions on three counts under s 233B(i) of the Customs Act 1901 (Cth). The core of the applicant's argument was that the trial judge's directions to the jury about a lie he allegedly told were inadequate, and that the jury should have been directed to consider alternative reasons for the lie other than guilt and fear of the truth. Additionally, the applicant argued that the jury should have been required to find beyond reasonable doubt that he lied due to guilt and fear of the truth. The third ground for appeal was that the jury's verdicts were unsafe and unsatisfactory as the Crown failed to exclude a rational hypothesis consistent with innocence, specifically that the applicant was unaware of the contents of the envelopes.

The High Court examined whether the trial judge's instructions to the jury adequately covered the nuances of why the applicant might have lied. It was held that the trial judge did not sufficiently direct the jury on the various possible reasons for the applicant's alleged lie, nor did she require the jury to find beyond reasonable doubt that the lie was due to guilt and fear of the truth. This omission was considered a significant error as it potentially impacted the jury's assessment of the applicant's credibility and the weight they ascribed to his account. The Court concluded that these errors in the jury directions were substantial enough to warrant a retrial. Consequently, the High Court allowed the appeal on the second ground and ordered a retrial, remanding the applicant to the District Court for this purpose.