Davis v The Queen

In *Davis v The Queen*, the High Court of Australia considered an appeal against a conviction for murder. The appellant, Davis, had been found guilty by a jury and sentenced to imprisonment. The central dispute revolved around the admissibility of certain evidence and the fairness of the trial process.

The High Court was required to determine whether the trial judge had erred in admitting evidence that the appellant had remained silent when questioned by police after being cautioned. Specifically, the court had to consider the application of section 89 of the *Evidence Act 1995* (NSW) (which applies in criminal proceedings in New South Wales) and its predecessor, the common law rule against adverse inferences from silence. The court also considered whether the trial judge’s directions to the jury regarding this evidence were adequate.

McHugh and Hayne JJ reasoned that section 89 of the *Evidence Act 1995* (NSW) generally prohibits drawing adverse inferences from a failure to answer questions after a caution. However, they noted that the prohibition does not apply where the failure to answer is relied upon to show consciousness of guilt, rather than as evidence of the truth of the matter not answered. In this instance, the court found that the trial judge had misdirected the jury by allowing them to draw an adverse inference from the appellant's silence, thereby creating a substantial miscarriage of justice.

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