Evans v The Queen

The appeal in *Evans v The Queen* concerned the admissibility of evidence presented during the appellant's trial for robbery. The prosecution requested that the appellant, during the trial, wear a balaclava and overalls found at his residence, along with sunglasses not in evidence, and walk before the jury while uttering words attributed to the robber. The central dispute revolved around whether this "in court demonstration" was legally permissible.

The High Court of Australia was required to determine several legal issues. These included whether the in-court demonstration was relevant to the proceedings, whether it was unfairly prejudicial to the appellant, and the applicability of section 53 of the *Evidence Act 1995* (NSW) to such demonstrations. The Court also considered whether the common law permitted such conduct if the Act did not apply, and whether the trial judge's rulings and warnings to the jury regarding this and other evidence, including the exclusion of alibi evidence, constituted a miscarriage of justice. Finally, the Court had to consider whether, in light of any errors, the proviso to section 6(1) of the *Criminal Appeal Act* could be applied to uphold the conviction.

A majority of the High Court, comprising Gummow and Hayne JJ, allowed the appeal. Their reasoning, in part, differed from the joint reasons by finding that the in-court demonstration was legally irrelevant to the issues in the trial, rather than being unfairly prejudicial. This finding was determinative of the appeal. Kirby J agreed with the orders proposed in the joint reasons, while Heydon and Crennan JJ dissented.

The High Court ordered that the appeal be allowed, the orders of the Court of Criminal Appeal be set aside, and that the appellant's convictions be quashed, with a new trial to be ordered.