Fitzgerald v The Queen; Sumner v The Queen

In *Fitzgerald v The Queen* and *Sumner v The Queen*, the High Court of Australia considered appeals against convictions for murder. The central dispute concerned the admissibility of confessions made by the appellants to police. 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 trial judges erred in admitting the confessions into evidence. Specifically, the Court had to consider whether the confessions were made voluntarily, having regard to the totality of the circumstances in which they were obtained. This involved an assessment of whether the confessions were the product of the free will of the accused, or whether they were induced by oppressive police conduct or other factors that compromised their reliability.

The Court applied the established legal principles governing the admissibility of confessions, which require that a confession must be voluntary to be admitted into evidence. A confession is considered involuntary if it is obtained by violence, or by any threat or promise from a person in authority. The Court examined the evidence presented at trial regarding the conduct of the police officers during the interviews with the appellants, including the length of the interviews, the manner of questioning, and any inducements or threats that may have been made. The Court held that the trial judges had correctly applied the law and that the confessions were properly admitted into evidence.

The appeals were dismissed.