Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
(a) The parties to the proceedings are Graham Henr y Doggett for
(c) The term HCA stands for High Court of Australia; whereby it
represent the court in which the proceeding was being heard in.
Number “182” is the page number of the first page of the case
and number “1” refers to the volume of the reported case is in.
(e) There are 5 judges decided on this case; they are Gleeson CJ,
proceeding.
1
QUESTION 2
At the first instance, the case was heard in the Supreme Court of
Queensland. Based upon the case reported, the case is heard on appeal.
This is because, it has been stated in the case reported that the appeal has
been allowed and retrial shall be held. Besides that, one could see that Mr.
Doggett is appealing for the offences that he had committed against The
Crown.
2
QUESTION 3
In one’s observation, there are about 5 major issues that are highly
likely to be seen.
disadvantages that the appellant would labour under at trial due to the
delay, despite the fact that the accused’s counsel at trial, did not seek such
a direction.
had failed to act in a way which is in fact contradict with his supposed
likely not applicable to the present case and which may confuse the jury.
proviso.
3
QUESTION 4
There are reasons for the decision made, which the issues had been
stated in the previous question. Now, let us deal with the court’s reason
offences.
Next, the corroborative evidence did not relieve the trial judge from
what other potential witnesses were doing when the offences were alleged
4
Subsequently, the appellant is married to the complainant’s mother.
Because of this, the appellant has become part of the family, as the
Doggett, to look after her daughter and sons; and not to sexually harass
treatment in Brisbane.
juries. Thus, the circumstances which invite or require comment are those
be within the jur y’s common understanding or experience, but which, with
should be given in terms which make it clear to the jur y that it is not a
direction of law binding on them, and that they are free to place such
Last but not least, the fact that there may have been a strong case
coupled with the fact that experienced trial counsel failed to seek a
direction were both relevant to the potential operation of the proviso but
were not sufficient basis, absent the warning, for the Court to be satisfied
5
QUESTION 5
At the end of the case, it was noted that the tapped telephone
the appellant through the honest oral evidence made by the complainant.
The judicial warnings to the jury did not comply with the law established
b y Longman . Leading the appellant failed for acquittal and the ‘proviso’
QUESTION 6
The formal order of the case was that, the appeal was upheld, and