R v Su & Goerlitz

In the case of R v Su & Goerlitz, the defendants were charged with various criminal offences. The primary dispute centred on the admissibility of an electronically recorded interview, where the defendants had been denied access to a legal practitioner and questioned without a delay. The case was heard in the Supreme Court of Victoria. The legal issues before the court involved the application of fairness and public policy discretions under common law and statutory provisions, specifically sections 464C and 464R of the Crimes Act 1958. The court had to determine whether the police had reasonable grounds to refuse access to a legal practitioner and whether the failure to defer questioning constituted a breach of section 464C.

The court examined the police conduct in refusing the defendants' request for legal representation and delaying the commencement of questioning. It found that there were no reasonable grounds for such refusal and failure to defer. Consequently, the court exercised its discretion to exclude the initial interview due to the unfairness caused by the police actions. The court also considered the subsequent interview conducted after the defendants had access to legal representation. Given the initial breach and the resulting forensic disadvantage, the court decided to exclude this interview as well. Additionally, the court addressed the admissibility of DNA results obtained from a forensic sample under sections 464R and 464S of the Crimes Act 1958. The court weighed various factors relevant to exercising its discretion, ultimately concluding that the evidence should be excluded.

The court's final orders included the exclusion of both interviews and the DNA results from the evidence in the trial, reflecting its determination to uphold the principles of fairness and the integrity of the judicial process.