High Court of Australia
ORIGIN.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA
PANARELLO. —
nen AE. QUEEN —
as
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
Oral Judgment delivered at_ SYDNEY... on... Friday, 11th Decaaber 1964
'A.C. Brooks, Government Pinter, Melbourne ©.7639,60
PANARELLO
ve
THE QUEEN
ORAL JUDGMENT JUDGMENT OF THE COURT DELIVERED BY BARWICK C.J.
CORAM: BARWICK C.J. kITo J. TAYLOR J. WINDEYER J. OWEN J.
PANARELLO
Mr. Wright in this case has put before us, in a careful way, all we think that could be said in support of the appeal. He raises, first of all, on the appeal proper, an objection to the summing up of his Honour in respect of the onus of proof resting upon the Crown. We are of opinion that, taken in its totality in this case, there was no misdirection by his Honour with respect to the onus resting upon the Crown.
Mr. Wright also raises a matter which is not a matter of law, by way of objection to the summing up, in saying that his Honour inadequately placed before the jury the evidence of the medical witness on the question of the accused's capacity at the time of the commission of the act, on the issue of insanity. We have considered what Mr. Wright has put before us, but we are of opinion that this objection to the summing up cannot be sustained.
In those circumstances, the appeal will be dismissed.
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate