Fray v The State of Western Australia

The appellant, Fray, appeals against his conviction on one count of assault occasioning bodily harm and one count of causing grievous bodily harm. The appeal was heard by the Supreme Court of Western Australia, where the trial had originally taken place. The appellant argues that the trial judge should have directed the jury, at the time the co*accused's statement to police was adduced, that it was not evidence against him. He further contends that the trial judge should have given an accomplice warning when the co*accused gave evidence at trial and that the evidence from the security camera footage, which was only available after the trial, shows a miscarriage of justice.

The court considered the appellant's arguments regarding the trial judge's directions and the accomplice warning. The court held that the trial judge's summing up provided a proper direction to the jury, and there was no miscarriage of justice in not giving a contemporaneous direction. Regarding the accomplice warning, the court found that the warning given in the summing up was sufficient. The court also examined the security camera footage, concluding that it did not demonstrate a miscarriage of justice. The appellant's application for an extension of time, an order for the production of new evidence, and leave to rely on additional evidence were dismissed.

In summary, the Supreme Court dismissed the appellant's application for leave to appeal against his conviction. The court found no miscarriage of justice in the trial judge's directions or the absence of a contemporaneous accomplice warning. Additionally, the security camera footage did not indicate a miscarriage of justice. Consequently, the appellant's applications for an extension of time, an order for the production of new evidence, and leave to rely on additional evidence were also dismissed.