R v Secretary

The case of *R v Secretary* concerned a question of law reserved for the Court of Criminal Appeal of the Northern Territory. The appellant, Helen Patricia Secretary, had been on trial for murder. The central issue revolved around whether the defence of self-defence was available to her. The trial judge had concluded that, in the circumstances of the case, self-defence could not be considered by the jury.

The legal question before the Court of Criminal Appeal was whether the trial judge's conclusion was correct. Specifically, the court had to determine if it would be open for a jury to find that, at the time the deceased was shot, an assault was still in progress and that the appellant had acted in self-defence. This involved considering the nature of the assault being defended and the requirement for a contemporaneous connection between the assault and the act of self-defence.

A majority of the court, comprising Angel and Mildren JJ., found that an assault continues so long as the threat and the apparent ability to carry out that threat remain. They reasoned that an assault should not be regarded as spent merely because the perpetrator is temporarily physically unable to carry out the threat. Consequently, they ordered a new trial. Martin CJ., dissenting, held that there must be a contemporaneous connection between the assault and the act of self-defence, and that neither the threat nor the apparent ability to apply force existed at the time the appellant shot the deceased.