Regina v JP (No 1)

[2013] NSWSC 1678

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation:	Regina v JP (No 1) [2013] NSWSC 1678
Hearing dates:	30 October 2013
Decision date:	30 October 2013
Jurisdiction:	Common Law - Criminal
Before:	Hall J
Decision:	Order made that Juror be discharged from jury pursuant to s 53A of the Jury Act
Catchwords:	CRIMINAL LAW - juror misconduct - Internet research by juror as to law - examination by judge of juror in question and foreperson - discharge of juror
Legislation Cited:	Jury Act 1977
Cases Cited:	R v JP (No 2) [2013] NSWSC 1679 R v Sio (No 3) [2013] NSWSC 1414
Category:	Procedural and other rulings
Parties:	Regina (Crown) JP (Accused)
Representation:	Counsel: P Leask (Crown) P Young SC (Accused) Solicitors: Solicitor for Public Prosecutions (Crown) Lex Fori Lawyers (Accused)
File Number(s):	2011/235975

Judgment

1. At about 12.30pm on 30 October 2013, the jury sent a note which was marked as MFI-68. The note, written by the foreperson of the jury, referred to the fact that one juror had undertaken legal research by way of an Internet search.

1. The procedure then adopted pursuant to directions I gave on the above date was to have the Sheriff's officer request the foreperson to leave the jury room and accompany him to the Court. Following his examination, the Sheriff's officer was requested to follow the same procedure in order to have the juror in question brought into the courtroom.

1. At about 2.00pm on that date, I proceeded to conduct an examination of the foreperson pursuant to s 55DA of the Jury Act 1977 ("the Act").

1. The information provided by the foreperson in answer to questions which I directed to him has been extracted into the reasons for the order made under s 53C of the Act in R v JP (No 2) [2013] NSWSC 1679 at [12].

1. I also proceeded with an examination of the juror in question. The questions and answers in relation to that examination have also been set out in R v JP (No 2) at [13].

The Statutory Provisions

1. Part 7A of the Jury Act is entitled "Discharge of Jurors". The provisions of ss 53A and 53B are concerned with the discharge of individual jurors.

1. Section 53A is concerned with the mandatory discharge of an individual juror. Pursuant to the provisions of that section, a court must discharge a juror if in the course of any trial:

"(a) The juror has engaged in misconduct in relation to the trial ..."

1. The term "misconduct" is defined in s 53A(2) to included:

"Conduct that constitutes an offence against this Act."

1. A juror who conducted legal research on the internet would be in breach of the trial directions which I gave at the commencement of the trial. It would also constitute a breach of the provisions of s 68C(1) and also s 68C(4) of the Act. In this respect, I respectfully agree and adopt what has been said in this regard in R v Sio (No 3) [2013] NSWSC 1414 at [7] per Adamson J.

1. Both counsel for the Crown, and the accused, submitted that the juror referred to in MFI-68 had to be discharged. That accorded with the conclusion which I had reached following the examination of the juror in question conducted pursuant to s 55DA and expressed.

1. On 30 October 2013 I made an order that the relevant juror be discharged. I indicated that I would publish my reasons on a later date.

1. Following the completion of the examination, the juror in question was immediately separated from the jurors who were then in the jury room. Arrangements were made for the Sheriff's officer to retrieve her personal belongings from the jury room on her behalf.

1. The jury, constituted by the eleven remaining jurors, was brought back into Court and informed that the relevant juror had been discharged, and in that respect the jury were given a direction in line with the Criminal Bench Book direction at [1-515].

Finding and Order

1. The discharged juror engaged in misconduct in breach of s 68C of the Act. Upon that finding, on 30 October 2013 I made the following order:

Order that the juror be discharged from the jury pursuant to s 53A of the Jury Act 1977.

**********

Decision last updated: 21 March 2014