Director of Public Prosecutions v Ho and Ors (Supplementary Ruling No.9)

[2009] VSC 393

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF VICTORIA Not Restricted

CRIMINAL DIVISION

No. 1485 of 2006

DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS (COMMONWEALTH)

v

KAM TIN HO & ORS

---

JUDGE:	CUMMINS J
WHERE HELD:	Melbourne
DATE OF HEARING:	12 March 2009
DATE OF RULING:	13 March 2009
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	DPP v Ho & Ors (Supplementary Ruling No.9)
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2009] VSC 393	Revised 19 October 2009

---

Supplementary Ruling to Ruling No 9.

---

APPEARANCES:	Counsel	Solicitors
For the Director	Mr D Gurvich with Mr R Davis	Director of Public Prosecutions
For the Accused Kam Tin Ho	Mr J Dickinson SC	Theo Magazis & Associates
For the Accused Ho Kam Ho	Mr J Montgomery SC	Slades & Parsons
For the Accused Hoo	Mr J Bisas	Michael J Gleeson & Associates Pty Ltd
For the Accused Rahardjo	Mr L Hartnett	Robert Stary & Associates

----------

Supplementary Ruling No.9

HIS HONOUR:

[This Supplementary Ruling is in written form and was not pronounced on 12 March 2009.  It is circulated to the parties and to persons affected and formally will be published on the resumed date, 17 March 2009]

---

Supplementary Ruling No.9

HIS HONOUR:

1. As stated in Ruling No.9 I have vacated the Jury Panel summoned in this matter for 16 March 2009 and have directed that a Panel be summoned for 20 April 2009.

1. The necessity for that vacation has arisen from two articles published in today’s section of “The Age”.  The articles are, on page 3, headed “Brothels forced to display warnings on sex slavery”; and, on page 19, headed “Bought and sold”.  The articles respectively appear in the News and the Focus sections of “The Age”.  There also has been published an online multimedia presentation on sex trafficking in Melbourne at theage.com.au.

1. The two written articles are responsible articles.  The news item on p.3 related principally to by-laws and planning laws under consideration in Victoria.  The analysis article in the Focus section related to the nature, incidents and extent of sexual slavery.  The articles were not sensationalist.  They quoted a number of responsible persons and office holders.  The issue is not the existence and publication of the articles but the timing of their publication.

1. Although not sensationalist, by the nature of the subject matter the articles contained a number of potent expressions.  The page 3 news article quoted a person characterising servitude and trafficking as “a heinous and dreadful crime”.  The p.19 Focus article spoke of “brutal things”, “brutal months”, “brutal reality”, “owned by the mob “, “the prison-brothel”, “haunted” and “traumatised”.  It contained analysis and citation of responsible persons including the Federal Minister for the Status of Women, the founder of Project Respect, the Sex Discrimination Commission (Commonwealth), a human rights lawyer and a Department of Immigration spokeswoman.  Both the p.3 news article and the p.19 Focus article purported to quote a senior Federal Police officer, with no specificity as to the date of interview or statement.

1. By reason of the timing of the articles, three working days before the empanelment of the jury, and for reasons I stated in Ruling No.9, I felt compelled in the interests of securing the fair trial of the accused to abandon the proposed empanelment for which 300 citizens had been summoned and to postpone the empanelment for one month.  That is a serious matter involving significant dislocation and cost.

1. The instant trial was well-known in the profession, law enforcement and the media.  It had been publicly listed for pre-empanelment submissions for several weeks.  I consider it is necessary therefore to set in train enquiry as to the matter of the timing of publication of the articles.  Accordingly I shall list the matter next week, at 10.00am on Tuesday 17 March 2009, and ask that legal representatives of The Age appear before me and that leading counsel for the Commonwealth Mr Gurvich appear before me, both with instructions to respond as to how the timing of the situation arose.  In the latter case I expect instructions as to the timing and circumstances of the statements by the senior Federal Police Officer to be forthcoming.

---