Deacon v The Queen

This matter concerned an application for leave to appeal against conviction by the applicant, Deacon, following a "Mr Big" operation. The central dispute revolved around whether admissions made by the applicant to undercover police officers were influenced by "oppressive conduct" during the operation. The case was heard by Grant CJ, Southwood J, and Riley AJ.

The legal issues before the court were whether the admissions made by the applicant during the covert police operation constituted "oppressive conduct" such that they should be excluded as evidence. This required the court to consider the nature and content of the specific operation, the context in which the admissions were made, and the applicant's personal characteristics and position. The court was guided by principles established in previous Australian cases dealing with similar covert police operations.

The court reasoned that covert "scenario" operations, while involving deception, do not inherently constitute "oppressive conduct" requiring the exclusion of confessions or admissions. The court agreed with the trial judge's conclusion that the operation was not conducted in a manner that created a coercive environment or infringed the applicant's rights. The deception and trickery employed were found to be neither unlawful nor unusual investigative techniques, and the operation did not involve the assumption of unlawful powers or the exercise of authority in a cruel or unjust manner. Crucially, there was no actual criminal activity or violence involved in the scenarios, and the applicant's participation was voluntary, evidenced by his ability to decline participation due to other commitments.

The application for leave to appeal was dismissed.