Wu v The Queen

The case of *Wu v The Queen* concerned an appeal to the High Court of Australia following the conviction of the appellant, Wu, for State offences. The central dispute revolved around the trial judge's decision to discharge a juror due to reported illness and to continue the trial with fewer than the full complement of twelve jurors.

The legal issues before the High Court were whether the trial judge erred in discharging the juror, whether the judge's power or discretion was miscarried in the manner it was exercised, and whether the decision to discharge a juror and the decision to continue with fewer than twelve jurors involved separate considerations. The appellant argued that the significance of the number twelve in criminal juries, rooted in history, constitutional considerations, and statutory provisions, was a matter of great weight that the trial judge had dismissed as irrelevant.

The High Court, in dismissing the appeal, affirmed the decision of the Court of Criminal Appeal. The Court acknowledged the historical and constitutional importance of a jury of twelve. However, it was held that the trial judge had acted in accordance with the relevant statutory provisions, which permitted the discharge of a juror found to be incapable of continuing to act. The Court found that the information before the judge regarding the juror's illness was sufficient to warrant the discharge, and that the judge's assessment of the juror's incapacity was not premature. The Court also considered that the decision to discharge a juror and the decision to continue with a reduced jury involved distinct considerations, both of which were properly addressed by the trial judge.