R v Bunting and Wagner

In the case of R v Bunting and Wagner, the applicants sought leave to appeal against their convictions for multiple counts of murder. Mr Bunting was found guilty by a jury of 11 counts of murder, while Mr Wagner pleaded guilty to three counts and was found guilty by a jury of a further seven counts of murder. The applicants argued several grounds for appeal, including errors in the trial judge's directions to the jury concerning similar fact evidence, taking and sharing of victims' property, and false stories about their whereabouts. They also contended that certain counts of murder were not properly joined, and that the trial judge should have ordered separate trials on certain counts. The applicants further argued that their verdicts were unsafe and unsatisfactory, and that the trial judge erred in various directions to the jury.

The legal issues before the court were whether the trial judge erred in his directions to the jury and whether the verdicts were unsafe and unsatisfactory. The court found that the trial judge had dealt with the large amount of material before him with admirable clarity and balance. Consequently, the court was satisfied that the various criticisms of the trial judge's directions were not reasonably arguable, and leave to appeal should be refused on those grounds. However, the court considered that further argument should be heard before the court on grounds relating to the length and complexity of the trial. Apart from that, leave to appeal was refused on all other grounds.

In conclusion, the court refused leave to appeal on all grounds, except for the issue relating to the length and complexity of the trial, which would be further argued before the court. The court found that the trial judge had provided adequate directions to the jury and that the verdicts were safe and satisfactory. As a result, the applicants' appeals were dismissed.