Wise v The Queen

In *Wise v The Queen*, the appellant, Wise, appealed to the Court of Criminal Appeal of New South Wales against his conviction for an offence. The appeal concerned several grounds relating to the admission and use of evidence, the summing up of the trial judge, and alleged misdirections.

The primary legal issues before the Court were whether the trial judge had erred in allowing the prosecution to cross-examine the appellant about a prior inconsistent statement, which had been initially raised during the appellant's evidence-in-chief, without objection. The Court also considered whether the prosecution's closing address, which suggested the appellant would lie to avoid gaol, constituted a misdirection requiring a specific direction from the judge to counteract it, and whether the judge's summing up adequately addressed the presumption of innocence in light of this suggestion. Further, the Court examined whether the prosecution had improperly used the guilty pleas of alleged co-offenders in its summing up and whether the judge's directions on aiding were sufficient.

The Court held that the cross-examination regarding the prior inconsistent statement did not constitute an impermissible splitting of the prosecution's case, particularly as no objection was raised at the time. However, the Court found that the prosecution's suggestion that the appellant would lie to avoid gaol, without a corresponding direction from the judge to provide an "antidote" and reinforce the presumption of innocence, amounted to a misdirection and a miscarriage of justice. While the use of guilty pleas of co-offenders was deemed an improper use in the summing up, the Court concluded that the judge's inadequate direction on this point did not, in itself, lead to a miscarriage of justice. The general direction on aiding was considered adequate.

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