R v McNeil

In the case of R v McNeil, the applicant, charged with murder and assault, sought a judge-alone trial on the grounds that extensive adverse media publicity would prejudice the jury pool. The application was heard by the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The central issue before the court was whether the adverse publicity, which had ceased some 14 months before the scheduled trial date, would still affect the potential jurors' impartiality. The court also considered the role of intention and credibility issues in determining the likelihood of prejudice.

The court examined the principles governing the applicability of a judge-alone trial, focusing on the 'interests of justice' test. The applicant argued that the publicity would irreversibly taint the jury pool despite the time elapsed. The court acknowledged the potential for prejudice but highlighted the steps available to guard against electronic access to the previous adverse publicity, such as jury sequestration and voir dire. The court further noted that the case involved intention and credibility issues, which might be particularly susceptible to pre-trial publicity. Ultimately, the court determined that the applicant had not sufficiently demonstrated that a judge-alone trial was necessary to ensure a fair trial.

The court dismissed the application for a judge-alone trial, concluding that the passage of time and the measures available to mitigate the effects of pre-trial publicity were sufficient to safeguard the applicant's right to a fair trial. The court emphasised that the onus was on the applicant to show a substantial risk of prejudice that could not be addressed through other means. The court did not find the arguments presented compelling enough to warrant a judge-alone trial.