R v Mathews

The appeal was heard in the Court of Appeal of Queensland by the Chief Justice and two other Justices. The appellant, Russell Gordon Haig Mathews, was convicted of intimidating a witness under section 36A of the Crimes Act 1914. The appellant sought to appeal against his conviction on several grounds, including the trial judge's summing-up to the jury and the conduct of his solicitor. The primary legal issue was the proper interpretation of section 36A of the Crimes Act, specifically whether intent to deter the witness from giving evidence was an essential element of the offence.

The Court found that the trial judge's direction to the jury was accurate, and the judge's reference to the appellant's intent to deter the witness was appropriate but not essential. The Court held that the expression "on account of" in the statute indicated that the intimidation must be related to the victim's anticipated appearance as a witness, but it did not require a specific intent to deter the witness. The Court noted that the statute's scope was broader than common law offences related to the perversion of justice, encompassing a wider range of motives.

The Court concluded that any error in the trial judge's summing-up did not prejudice the appellant, as the jury was adequately directed on the essential elements of the offence. The appeal against conviction was dismissed, and the original conviction was upheld.