R v Stephen

The defendant, Stephen, applied for a change of venue for his criminal trial from a regional centre to Sydney. The basis of the application was that it was unlikely that an impartial jury could be selected in the regional centre due to the publicity surrounding the case and potential biases within the community. The application was heard by a judge of the Supreme Court of the relevant state.

The legal issues before the court were whether the publicity and potential biases in the regional centre were such that it was unlikely that an impartial jury could be selected, and if so, whether other factors such as the convenience of witnesses, the availability of jurors, and the interests of justice outweighed any inconvenience caused to the defendant by moving the trial to Sydney. The court considered the relevant case law and statutory provisions in making its decision.

The court found that the publicity surrounding the case and potential biases within the community were such that it was unlikely that an impartial jury could be selected in the regional centre. The court also considered other relevant factors such as the convenience of witnesses, the availability of jurors, and the interests of justice. The court found that these factors did not outweigh the need to ensure that the defendant received a fair trial before an impartial jury. The trial date and location were therefore confirmed as Sydney.

No further orders were made by the court.