R v Wrigley (No 5)

In the case of R v Wrigley (No 5), the respondent, Wrigley, was appealing against his conviction on the basis that he was denied a fair trial by not being granted access to the transcript of the evidence given by witnesses during the trial. The trial was conducted in the Supreme Court of New South Wales before a jury, and the matter was heard by the Court of Criminal Appeal. The central issue was whether the trial judge should have allowed the respondent to access the transcript of the evidence given by witnesses during the trial, particularly in the context of the jury's deliberations.

The Court of Criminal Appeal considered whether the trial judge had erred in not granting the respondent's request to access the transcript. The court examined the circumstances of the request and whether there were any reasons to believe that the jury might be influenced by the transcript. The court noted that the request was not opposed by the prosecution and that the jury had already been discharged. The court held that in the absence of any opposition to the request and given that the jury had already been discharged, the trial judge should have allowed the respondent to access the transcript. The court held that the trial judge's refusal to grant the request was an error of law and that it deprived the respondent of a fair trial.

The Court of Criminal Appeal quashed the conviction and ordered a retrial. The court held that the error of law was not merely a technical one but had the potential to affect the fairness of the trial and the outcome. The court held that the error was not trivial and that it deprived the respondent of a fair trial. The court held that the only appropriate course of action was to quash the conviction and order a retrial. The court held that the error of law was not merely a technical one but had the potential to affect the fairness of the trial and the outcome.