Glyn Dickman v The Queen

The respondent, Glyn Dickman, was convicted by a jury of intentionally causing serious injury and making a threat to kill. He appealed against the conviction to the South Australian Court of Appeal. The appeal raised three primary issues: whether the identification evidence was reliable, whether the evidence was unfairly prejudicial, and whether the verdict was unsafe and unsatisfactory.

The court first examined the identification evidence provided by the victim, who identified the respondent from a photoboard. The court considered whether the evidence was visual identification evidence and whether there was a failure to comply with section 114 of the Evidence Act 2008. The court held that the identification evidence was unreliable due to the risk of displacement effect and that the probative value of the identification evidence was outweighed by the risk of unfair prejudice. The court found that the evidence was unreliable and inadmissible.

The court then considered the admissibility of the audio and video record of the search conducted by police. The respondent argued that the search was conducted in contravention of South Australian law and that the audio record was obtained unfairly or in breach of law. The court found that the search was lawful and that the audio record was admissible for the purposes of voice identification.

Finally, the court considered whether the verdict was unsafe and unsatisfactory. The court found that the verdict was unsafe and unsatisfactory due to the exclusion of the identification evidence and the lack of other evidence to support the conviction. The court allowed the appeal and quashed the conviction.

The court ordered that the conviction be quashed and that a new trial be held. The court also ordered that the audio and video record of the search be excluded from evidence in any new trial. The court further ordered that the respondent be released on bail pending the new trial.