Bellamy v The Queen

Pamela Beverly Anne Bellamy applied to the High Court of Australia for special leave to appeal against a decision of a lower court. The applicant was represented by Mr D.M.J. Bennett, QC, and Mr R.A. Bonnici, while the respondent, the Queen, was represented by Mr B.M. James, QC, and Mr W.G. Roser. The core of the dispute concerned the directions given by the trial judge to the jury regarding the presumption of innocence.

The primary legal issue before the High Court was whether the trial judge's directions to the jury on the presumption of innocence constituted a misdirection, thereby providing grounds for special leave to appeal. Specifically, the applicant argued that the judge incorrectly stated the nature of the presumption of innocence, suggesting it was a presumption of "not guilty" rather than a presumption of innocence that the Crown must overcome.

The applicant contended that the judge’s statement that the accused comes before the jury with a presumption of "not guilty" was a misstatement of the legal principle. While the judge also correctly instructed the jury that they must be satisfied of guilt beyond reasonable doubt, the applicant argued that the initial misstatement of the presumption of innocence was not cured by subsequent correct directions. The High Court considered whether the judge's intention to focus the jury on the burden of proof, rather than the concept of innocence or guilt, was effectively conveyed and whether the misstatement prejudiced the applicant.