Thomas v The Queen & Anor

In *Thomas v The Queen & Anor*, the High Court of Australia considered an appeal from the Supreme Court of Victoria concerning the admissibility of evidence in a criminal trial. The appellant, Thomas, had been convicted of murder, and the appeal challenged the admission of certain evidence that he argued was unfairly prejudicial.

The central legal issue before the High Court was whether the trial judge had erred in admitting evidence of the appellant's prior convictions and alleged prior bad character. Specifically, the court had to determine if this evidence was relevant to the charges faced by the appellant and, if so, whether its probative value outweighed its prejudicial effect, thereby justifying its admission under the rules of evidence.

The High Court, in its reasoning, emphasised the fundamental principle that evidence of a person's prior convictions or bad character is generally inadmissible because it risks unfairly prejudicing the jury against the accused. While acknowledging that such evidence may be admissible in exceptional circumstances where it has a direct and relevant bearing on the issues in dispute, the court found that the evidence admitted in this instance did not meet that high threshold. The court applied the principles governing the admission of character evidence, focusing on the need for a clear and compelling connection between the prior conduct and the offence charged, and concluded that the admission of the evidence was an error.

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