Butler v The Queen

The matter of Butler v The Queen came before the High Court of Australia, where the appellant, Butler, appealed against his conviction for the murder of his wife. The crux of the dispute was whether the evidence presented at trial was sufficient to support the conviction of murder, particularly in light of the appellant's post-offence conduct and the potential for alternative explanations for the crime.

The legal issues before the court included whether the evidence was equally consistent with the intention to commit an unlawful and dangerous act resulting in death, and thus relevant to the charge of manslaughter rather than murder. The court also needed to determine whether the evidence was intractably neutral, and if it was not, whether the conviction for murder was unsafe or unsatisfactory.

The court found that the evidence was not intractably neutral and that the appellant's post-offence conduct, including his lies, could be relevant to his intent at the time of the offence. Given that the evidence was not equally consistent with the intention necessary for a murder conviction, the court concluded that the conviction for murder was unsafe or unsatisfactory. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, the conviction for murder was quashed, and the appellant was to be remitted for trial on a count of manslaughter.