SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND
CITATION: R v BGT and BA [2024] QSCPR 6 PARTIES: THE KING (respondent) v
BGT & BA(first and second applicant) FILE NO: Indictment No 236 of 2023 DIVISION: Trial Division PROCEEDING: Application under s 590AA of the Criminal Code DELIVERED ON: 5 February 2024, ex tempore DELIVERED AT: Brisbane HEARING DATE: 5 February 2024 JUDGE: Bowskill CJ ORDERS: The subpoena issued to the witness, BN, is set aside. CATCHWORDS:
CRIMINAL LAW – EVIDENCE – COMPETENCE AND COMPELLABILITY – where the prosecution seeks to compel
a co-offender to give evidence at the separate trial of two other co-offenders – where the proposed witness has been arraigned on the charges against him, entered pleas of guilty and the allocutus has been administered, but he has not yet been
sentenced – whether the witness is compellable at the trial of his co-offenders – whether the subpoena ought to be set aside
on discretionary grounds Criminal Code, s 590AA
Evidence Act 1977 (Qld), s 8(1)R v Pipe (1967) 51 Cr App R 17
R v Turner (1975) 61 Cr App R 67
R v Verrall [2012] QCA 310
R v Nerbas [2012] 1 Qd R 362
R v Gibb [2018] QCA 120COUNSEL: D Caruana and G M Elmore for the first applicant
L Reece for the second applicant
J D Finch for the respondent
E Whitton for the witnessSOLICITORS: ACGL Lawyers for the first applicant
Legal Aid Queensland for the second applicant
Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions for the
respondentWallace O’Hagan Lawyers for the witness
The defendants are charged, on indictment number 236 of 2023, with serious offences arising out of a home invasion in the early hours of 16 August 2021, including burglary by breaking in the night while armed and in company, and four counts of attempted murder, or alternatively, malicious act with intent.
There is a third young person, who I will call BN, who was also charged with offences arising out of the circumstances on this night. It is alleged BN travelled to the place where the home invasion is alleged to have occurred in a stolen car with the defendants and another person. It is said BN stayed in the car with that other person while the defendants went into the house. He was charged, by indictment presented in the Childrens Court, with burglary and stealing, unlawful use of a motor vehicle (in relation to the stealing of the car) and then a further count of burglary, with various circumstances of aggravation, and four counts of malicious act with intent (in relation to the home invasion and the offences of violence alleged to have been committed there). As to the latter offences committed in the home, BN has accepted criminal responsibility as a party.
BN was arraigned on that indictment on 23 November 2023 and pleaded guilty to each count on the indictment. The allocutus was administered. The judge did not proceed to sentence BN on that day,…
Continue reading R v BGT and BA
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- R v BGT and BA [2024] QSCPR 6
- Case
- [2024] QSCPR 6
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issue was whether the court could compel the testimony of BN despite her resistance. This involved balancing the rights of the witness against the rights of the accused to a fair trial and the public interest in the administration of justice. The court examined the provisions of the Evidence Act and case law on the competency and compellability of witnesses. It also considered the impact of compelling BN to testify on her mental and physical well-being.
The court concluded that compelling BN to testify would cause her significant emotional distress and trauma, which outweighed the public interest in her testimony. The court found that BN's fear of retribution was genuine and that her mental state made it unlikely she could give coherent and reliable evidence. The court set aside the subpoena, recognising the importance of protecting witnesses from undue harm. The decision underscored the need to consider the welfare of witnesses in the administration of criminal justice.
Orders
Orders of the court
The subpoena issued to the witness, BN, is set aside.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.