R v Wilton

The appeal concerned Ms Wilton, who was convicted of criminal offences. The central dispute revolved around the admissibility of evidence concerning communications between jurors, specifically regarding information about Ms Wilton's prior convictions that had not been presented during the trial. The matter was heard by the Full Court of the Supreme Court of South Australia, comprising Sulan, Kelly, and Blue JJ.

The court was required to determine whether evidence of communications between jurors was admissible, particularly when those communications involved information about the defendant's prior convictions that had not been admitted into evidence during the trial. A key legal issue was whether such information constituted an improper extraneous influence on the jury's deliberations and, if so, whether its disclosure to the jury rendered the verdict unsafe and thus grounds for appeal.

Blue J, with whom Sulan and Kelly JJ agreed, held that evidence of communications between jurors is not automatically inadmissible. Such evidence is admissible if the communication can be characterised as extraneous to the jury's deliberations. In this instance, the affidavits from the jurors were deemed admissible because the conversations detailed within them were not part of the jury's deliberative process. The court found that information about Ms Wilton's prior convictions, which had not been formally admitted as evidence, constituted an improper extraneous influence. Consequently, a miscarriage of justice occurred due to this improper influence.

The court allowed the appeal, set aside the conviction, and remitted the matter for a retrial. This outcome was based on the inability of the court to be satisfied that the same verdict would have been returned had the jury not been exposed to the improper extraneous influence of Ms Wilton's prior convictions.