Hili v The Queen; Jones v The Queen

The High Court of Australia considered appeals by Hili and Jones against their convictions for murder. Both appellants had been convicted in the Supreme Court of Victoria following separate trials. The central issue in both appeals concerned the admissibility of confessions made by the appellants to police officers.

The High Court was required to determine whether the confessions made by Hili and Jones were improperly obtained and therefore inadmissible in evidence. Specifically, the Court had to consider whether the confessions were obtained in circumstances that rendered them unreliable or unfair, having regard to the provisions of the *Crimes Act 1958* (Vic) and the common law. This involved an examination of the conduct of the police during the interviews and the voluntariness of the statements made by the appellants.

The Court applied the principles governing the admissibility of confessions, particularly the exclusionary rule which mandates the exclusion of confessions obtained by unfair or improper means, or those that are unreliable. The High Court found that the trial judges had erred in admitting the confessions in both cases. In Hili's case, the Court held that the confession was obtained in circumstances where the appellant was subjected to oppressive questioning and was not afforded his rights, rendering it inadmissible. Similarly, in Jones' case, the Court determined that the confession was obtained in circumstances that were unfair and oppressive, leading to its exclusion.

Consequently, the High Court allowed both appeals, quashed the convictions for murder, and ordered new trials for both Hili and Jones.