Lin v Tasmania

The Supreme Court of Tasmania, Court of Criminal Appeal, heard an appeal by Lin against his conviction. The dispute concerned alleged misdirections by the trial judge to the jury, particularly in relation to a circumstantial case and the standard of proof.

The Court was required to determine whether the trial judge's directions to the jury constituted a miscarriage of justice. Specifically, the appeal raised questions about whether the judge's directions on circumstantial evidence, including the absence of a full *Azzopardi* direction, were adequate. The Court also considered whether the judge's explanation of the distinction between a reasonable explanation of innocence and a mere possibility of innocence was erroneous. Further issues included the reasonableness of the trial judge's finding that the prosecution had shown reasonable cause for not calling the makers of certain business records, and the admissibility and relevance of handwriting expert evidence.

The Court found that while the *Azzopardi* direction was not given in its full form, the judge's directions covered the same ground and fulfilled the purpose of that direction. However, the Court held that the judge's direction stating that a reasonable explanation consistent with innocence was not a possibility, and the reference to the distinction between a reasonable explanation and a "mere possibility" or "bare possibility" of innocence, were erroneous and amounted to a miscarriage of justice. Despite these misdirections, the Court found that the jury's verdict of guilt was open to them on the whole of the evidence, particularly given the prosecution's case was based on business records and handwriting expert evidence, and that an acquittal was not appropriate.

Consequently, the Court allowed the appeal, quashed the conviction, and ordered that the appellant be retried on the indictment.