Stuart-Jones v The Queen

The High Court of Australia considered an appeal by Stuart-Jones against a conviction for murder. The central dispute concerned the admissibility of certain evidence obtained during a police investigation.

The primary legal issue before the High Court was whether the evidence, which included statements made by the appellant to police, had been obtained in contravention of the *Crimes Act 1914* (Cth) and, if so, whether it should have been admitted into evidence under section 138 of the *Evidence Act 1995* (Cth). This involved determining whether the impropriety in obtaining the evidence outweighed the public interest in its admission.

The Court analysed the circumstances surrounding the obtaining of the evidence, noting that the appellant had been interviewed by police without being cautioned as required by law. Kirby J and Hayne J, in separate judgments, both concluded that the evidence had been obtained improperly. However, they differed on the application of section 138. Kirby J found that the public interest in admitting the evidence did not outweigh the public interest in discouraging unlawful conduct by police, and therefore the evidence should have been excluded. Hayne J, while agreeing the evidence was improperly obtained, found that the impropriety was not so significant as to warrant exclusion under section 138, and that the public interest favoured its admission.

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