Cameron & Anor v The Queen

This matter came before the High Court of Australia on an application for special leave to appeal by Allan Bower Cameron and Mark (the applicants) against the respondent, The Queen. The applicants sought to appeal a decision of the Court of Criminal Appeal. The core of the dispute concerned the trial judge's response to a question posed by the jury during deliberations.

The legal issues before the High Court were twofold. Firstly, the applicants contended that the trial judge's answer to a specific jury question was misleading, thereby raising a point of special importance regarding the role of a trial judge in responding to jury inquiries. Secondly, the applicants argued that the Court of Criminal Appeal erred in its assessment of this issue, raising a further point of special importance concerning the appellate court's role in reviewing such matters.

The applicants argued that the trial judge had previously directed the jury that if they rejected certain confessional material, there would be no case against the accused and an acquittal would follow. The jury subsequently asked if the judge had stated that if they believed the unsigned Record of Interview was a fabrication, they must find the accused innocent of all charges. The trial judge's answer was a simple "It is true." While the applicants conceded the answer was literally correct, they argued its effect was misleading given the prior directions. The dissenting judge in the Court of Criminal Appeal had taken the view that the appellate court should consider the risk of a miscarriage of justice rather than a purely literal interpretation of the judge's answer.