R v Wills

In the matter of R v Wills, the defendant sought to be tried separately from his co-defendant, Hansen, who was also charged with murder. The crux of the application lay in the potential for prejudice from the evidence admissible only against Hansen, which could be misused by a jury in bolstering the circumstantial case against Wills. The court was tasked with determining whether the potential for prejudice could be sufficiently mitigated by appropriate directions to the jury, thereby avoiding positive injustice to Wills.

The legal issues centred on the admissibility of evidence solely relevant to Hansen's case and the potential for prejudice from its inclusion in a joint trial with Wills. The court had to weigh the risk of prejudice against the procedural fairness of a joint trial. The defence argued that Hansen's admissions and behaviour, which implicated Wills, could improperly influence the jury's assessment of the circumstantial evidence against Wills. The prosecution contended that appropriate jury directions could mitigate any risk of prejudice.

The court determined that the potential prejudice to Wills from the inadmissible evidence against Hansen could be sufficiently addressed through clear and robust jury directions. The court held that the risk of prejudice did not outweigh the advantages of a joint trial, including efficiency and economy. Consequently, the application for a separate trial was dismissed. The court emphasised the importance of clear and unequivocal directions to ensure that the jury would not improperly consider the inadmissible evidence when deliberating on Wills's case.

The court ordered that Wills and Hansen would be tried jointly, with the understanding that appropriate directions would be given to the jury to ensure the inadmissible evidence against Hansen was not used to bolster the prosecution case against Wills. The trial proceeded accordingly, ensuring that both defendants received a fair trial while maintaining the procedural efficiency of a joint trial.