Grosvenor v The Queen

The appeal concerned a conviction for drug possession. The appellant, Grosvenor, was charged with two counts relating to the possession of drugs. During the proceedings, Grosvenor initially indicated an intention to plead guilty to one count and not guilty to the other. However, he later changed his plea to not guilty on all counts before the trial commenced. The Crown sought to use his earlier indication of guilt as evidence of his creditworthiness, arguing it demonstrated a belief in his guilt. The appeal was heard by Riley CJ, Blokland and Hiley JJ.

The primary legal issues before the Court were whether the admission of evidence regarding the appellant's prior indication of an intention to plead guilty constituted an error of law, and whether the trial judge erred by failing to discharge the jury or provide a specific direction regarding the use of this evidence. The Court also considered the proper application of the evidentiary presumption of possession under the *Misuse of Drugs Act 1990* (NT) and the associated burden of proof concerning knowledge and control of dangerous drugs.

The Court held that the admission of the appellant's prior indication of an intention to plead guilty was highly prejudicial and constituted an error of law. It reasoned that such an indication, particularly when made by a self-represented litigant, is not an acknowledgement of guilt but rather a statement of intention that can be withdrawn. The Court found that the Crown's use of this statement in closing submissions, suggesting it was a reason for the jury to doubt the appellant's credit, was improper. Furthermore, the trial judge's failure to provide a specific direction to the jury on how to treat this evidence, or to discharge the jury, compounded the error. The Court concluded that these errors created a miscarriage of justice.

Consequently, the appeal was allowed, the conviction was quashed, and a retrial was ordered.