Segar v The Queen

Segar appealed his conviction for armed robbery to the High Court of Australia. The central dispute concerned the admissibility of evidence obtained through a police interview conducted after Segar had been arrested and charged. Segar argued that the interview was conducted in circumstances that rendered his admissions inadmissible, thereby vitiating his conviction.

The High Court was required to determine whether the trial judge had erred in admitting the evidence of the police interview. Specifically, the court had to consider whether the interview was conducted in contravention of the principles governing the admissibility of confessional evidence, particularly in light of the circumstances of Segar's arrest and the information available to the police at that time. The question was whether the admissions made by Segar were voluntary and whether their admission would be unfair to the appellant or contrary to public policy.

The High Court, in allowing the appeal, held that the trial judge had erred in admitting the evidence of the police interview. Brennan, Dawson and McHugh JJ reasoned that the police, at the time of the interview, possessed sufficient information to have charged Segar with the offence. The interview was conducted in circumstances where Segar was under arrest and had been informed that he was being interviewed in relation to the armed robbery. The court found that the admissions made by Segar were not voluntary in the true sense, as they were made in response to questioning by police who had already formed the belief that Segar was guilty and had sufficient evidence to charge him. The court applied the principle that confessional evidence obtained in such circumstances may be excluded if it is not voluntary or if its admission would be unfair to the accused or contrary to public policy.

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