R v Biljuh

The case of R v Biljuh involved the applicant seeking the discharge of the jury due to adverse publicity about the Crown Prosecutor personally. The application was heard in the Supreme Court of Queensland, Brisbane Division. The primary issue for the court was to determine whether a high degree of necessity had been reached to warrant the discharge of the jury and whether it was impractical for another barrister to be briefed to continue the trial.

The court examined the circumstances surrounding the adverse publicity, including its nature and extent, and its potential impact on the fairness of the trial. The judge considered the possibility of mitigating measures, such as giving directions to the jury, to address any concerns about prejudice. The court also weighed the practicality of briefing another barrister to continue the trial, taking into account the stage of the proceedings and the availability of suitable replacements. Ultimately, the court found that while the publicity was indeed adverse, it did not reach the threshold of a high degree of necessity that would warrant discharging the jury. Furthermore, the court determined that it was not impractical for another barrister to be briefed to continue the trial.

Consequently, the application for the discharge of the jury was rejected. The trial proceeded with the existing jury under the direction of a different Crown Prosecutor. The final orders of the court were that the jury remain empanelled and the trial continue with the substituted prosecutor.