R v Demeter

The case of R v Demeter involved an appeal against the conviction of Frank Tibor Demeter for three counts of indecent dealing with a child under the age of 12 years. The appeal raised two main issues: the propriety of allowing a dock identification of the appellant and the correctness of a direction given to the jury regarding the relevance of the appellant not having given evidence. The appeal was dismissed by the Supreme Court of Queensland.

The first issue concerned the dock identification of the appellant, which the trial judge allowed despite the dangers associated with such identifications. The Court held that there is a discretion to admit dock identification evidence in appropriate circumstances, particularly when there is strong evidence apart from dock identification that the person accused was the offender. In this case, the Court found that the trial judge's decision to allow dock identification was permissible and a sound course, as long as the right directions were given to the jury regarding its value.

The second issue involved the trial judge's direction to the jury regarding the relevance of the appellant not having given evidence. The judge gave an extensive direction, which the appellant argued was inappropriate and led the jury into error. The Court considered the High Court's decision in Weissensteiner v. The Queen (1993) 178 C.L.R. 217, which provided guidance on when a direction about the failure to give evidence may be appropriate. The Court held that the judge was entitled to give such a direction in this case and that the directions given, despite some deficiencies, did not make a significant difference to the result of the jury's deliberations. The Crown case was strong, and the only concrete suggestion pressed by the appellant's counsel at the trial was unsupported by any evidence.