Murdoch v The Queen

The case of *Murdoch v The Queen* concerned an appeal against convictions for murder and the subsequent sentence. The appellant, Murdoch, sought to challenge various evidentiary rulings made during his trial, as well as the severity of his sentence. The appeal was heard by Angel ACJ and Riley JJ, with Olsson AJ participating.

The central legal issues before the appellate court involved the admissibility of several forms of identification evidence, including a spontaneous identification from an internet photograph, a photoboard identification, and a dock identification. The court also considered the admissibility of evidence concerning similarities between the appellant's dog and a dog at the crime scene, the relevance of evidence regarding the appellant's possession and use of guns, and the appropriateness of an *Edwards* direction concerning the appellant's denial of being the person in a truckstop video. Furthermore, the admissibility and weight of expert evidence on facial and body mapping, and non-expert opinion evidence identifying the appellant in the truckstop video were scrutinised. Finally, the court was asked to determine if the indeterminate sentence with a non-parole period was manifestly excessive.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal against convictions, finding no miscarriage of justice that warranted setting aside the jury's verdict. While acknowledging that some evidence might have been admitted in questionable circumstances, the court applied the proviso, concluding that the evidence, taken as a whole, was so strong that no substantial miscarriage of justice had occurred. The appeal against the sentence was also dismissed.