Moses v The Queen

This matter came before the High Court of Australia on an application for special leave to appeal. The applicant, Moses, sought to appeal against a decision of a lower court. The respondent was The Queen. The central dispute concerned the admissibility of evidence relating to the mental state of a co-accused, Kesavarajah, and its relevance to Moses' defence.

The primary legal issue before the High Court was whether evidence concerning Kesavarajah's sanity, which was sought to be led by a co-accused (Dr Khoosal) and cross-examined upon by Moses' counsel at trial, ought to have been admitted. This evidence, given by Dr Walton on a voir dire, was intended to establish that Kesavarajah suffered from a psychotic condition, characterised by delusions of grandeur and rambling speech, and that this condition was consistent with observations made in 1992 and material from listening device tapes. The defence for Moses was that Kesavarajah's pronouncements were not to be taken seriously due to his mental state.

The court considered the footing upon which Moses could advance the rejection of evidence initially sought by a co-accused, Dr Khoosal, who had since been acquitted. The applicant's argument was that this evidence was material to the defence's contention that Kesavarajah's behaviour and statements were not to be taken seriously, as they stemmed from a diagnosed psychotic condition. The admissibility of Dr Walton's evidence, and its relevance to Moses' defence, was therefore the core of the application.