Heblos v The Queen

In *Heblos v The Queen*, the High Court of Australia considered an appeal by the applicant, Heblos, against his conviction for murder. The dispute centred on the admissibility of evidence obtained from the applicant during police interviews conducted after he had been arrested and charged.

The primary legal issue before the High Court was whether the evidence obtained from the applicant during the police interviews was admissible, given that the interviews took place after he had been charged with murder. This raised questions concerning the application of the common law exclusionary rule, which generally prohibits the admission of evidence obtained in breach of a suspect's rights, and the scope of police powers in relation to interviewing charged suspects.

Gaudron and Kirby JJ, in their joint judgment, held that the common law exclusionary rule, as developed in cases such as *R v Ireland* and *Bunning v Cross*, was engaged. Their Honours reasoned that the rule is not confined to evidence obtained in breach of statutory provisions but also applies where evidence is obtained in contravention of fundamental common law rights, including the right to remain silent and the right to legal representation. They found that the police interviews, conducted after the applicant had been charged and without him having had the opportunity to consult with a legal representative, were conducted in a manner that infringed upon these fundamental rights. Consequently, the evidence obtained from these interviews was deemed inadmissible.

The High Court allowed the appeal, quashed the conviction, and ordered a new trial.