R v Sutton

In the case of R v Sutton, the accused was charged with manslaughter under sections 300, 303, and 310 of the Criminal Code (Qld). The Crown applied for expert witnesses to give their evidence in person at the trial, while also applying for other witnesses to give their evidence via audio visual link or audio link. The application was unopposed. The court had to determine whether it was in the interests of justice for the witnesses to give evidence in person or via audio visual link and audio link.

The legal issues involved the application of sections 39PB and 39R of the Evidence Act 1977 and rule 53 of the Criminal Practice Rules 1999. The court had to decide whether the Crown was required to make out a case for using audio visual link and audio link, and whether it was in the interests of justice for witnesses to give evidence via these means. The court considered the statutory tests under sections 39PB and 39R, and the inclusive list of considerations under section 39PB(4) to determine if oral evidence should be given.

The court held that it was in the interests of justice for the expert witnesses to give their evidence in person, as they would need to refer to photographic and other exhibits, and some of their evidence may be controversial. On the other hand, the court held that it was in the interests of justice for the other witnesses to give their evidence via audio visual link or audio link, as their evidence was uncontroversial. The court did not find it necessary for the Crown to make out a case for using audio visual link and audio link, as the statutory tests under sections 39PB and 39R were discretionary and not prescriptive.

The court made directions pursuant to sections 39PB and 39R of the Evidence Act 1977 and rule 53 of the Criminal Practice Rules 1999, specifying which witnesses would give their evidence in person and which would give their evidence via audio visual link or audio link.