Richardson v The Queen

The case of *Richardson v The Queen* concerned an appeal to the High Court of Australia following a conviction for murder. The appellant, Richardson, had been found guilty of murder by a jury in the Supreme Court of Victoria and subsequently appealed to the Court of Appeal of Victoria, which dismissed his appeal. The central dispute revolved around the admissibility of certain evidence and the directions given to the jury by the trial judge.

The High Court was required to determine, primarily, whether the trial judge had erred in admitting evidence of the appellant's prior convictions and prior bad character. A further issue was whether the judge's directions to the jury regarding the use of this evidence, and concerning the issue of self-defence, were adequate and correct in law.

Gaudron and Hayne JJ, in their joint judgment, considered the principles governing the admissibility of evidence of prior convictions and bad character, particularly in the context of s 97 of the *Uniform Evidence Law* (Victoria). They held that the admission of evidence of prior convictions, which tended to show a propensity on the part of the appellant to commit the offence charged, was an error. The court reasoned that such evidence was not admissible to prove that the appellant had a propensity to commit the offence, and its prejudicial effect outweighed any probative value it might have had for other purposes. The judges also found that the directions given to the jury on self-defence were insufficient, failing to adequately explain the relevant legal principles.

The High Court allowed the appeal, quashed the conviction, and ordered a new trial.