Johns v The Queen

Johns appealed his conviction for armed robbery to the High Court of Australia. The central issue on appeal concerned the admissibility of evidence obtained from the appellant, which he argued was obtained in breach of his common law right to silence.

The High Court was required to determine whether the trial judge erred in admitting evidence of statements made by the appellant to police officers, despite the appellant having been cautioned that he was not obliged to answer questions. The court also considered the application of the common law exclusionary rule in relation to evidence obtained in breach of a suspect's right to silence.

The majority of the High Court held that the common law right to silence did not extend to preventing the admission of evidence obtained from a suspect who, after being cautioned, voluntarily answered questions. The court reasoned that the right to silence protected an accused from being compelled to answer questions, but it did not render inadmissible evidence voluntarily provided, even if the suspect had been informed they did not have to speak. The judges distinguished between compulsion and the voluntary provision of information.

The appeal was dismissed.