Cox v The Queen [2011] HCATrans 65

In *Cox v The Queen*, the High Court of Australia considered an appeal by the applicant, Cox, against his conviction for murder. The dispute centred on the admissibility of certain evidence during the trial.

The primary legal issue before the High Court was whether the trial judge had erred in admitting evidence that the applicant had remained silent when questioned by police about the murder. This raised questions concerning the application of the privilege against self-incrimination and the circumstances in which silence can be used as evidence against an accused.

The Court's reasoning focused on the principles established in *Weissensteiner v The Queen* and *Dyers v The Queen*. It held that while an accused's silence in the face of a police accusation can, in certain circumstances, be the subject of comment and inference by the jury, this is permissible only where the accused had a full opportunity to respond and the circumstances were such that a reasonable person would have been expected to deny the accusation. The Court found that the evidence of silence in this case was improperly admitted because the applicant had not been afforded a proper opportunity to respond to the allegations made by the police.

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