Disun v The Queen, Nurdin v The Queen

In *Disun v The Queen* and *Nurdin v The Queen*, the High Court of Australia considered appeals from convictions for murder. The central dispute concerned the admissibility of confessions made by the appellants to police officers. The appellants argued that their confessions were involuntary and therefore inadmissible, as they were obtained in circumstances that rendered them unreliable.

The High Court was required to determine whether the confessions made by Disun and Nurdin were voluntary, and consequently, whether they should have been admitted into evidence at their respective trials. This involved an examination of the principles governing the admissibility of confessions under Australian law, particularly where there are allegations of inducements, oppression, or unfairness in the manner of obtaining the statements.

The Court applied the established common law principles regarding the voluntariness of confessions. It held that a confession is inadmissible if it was made under duress, coercion, or as a result of inducements that rendered it unreliable. The judges analysed the specific circumstances surrounding each appellant's confession, including the length of questioning, the presence of legal advice, and the overall conduct of the police. Ultimately, the Court found that the confessions were voluntary and admissible, as there was no evidence to suggest they were not the product of the appellants' free will.