R v Laws [2000] NSWSC 885

Reported Decision : 116 A Crim R 70

New South Wales Supreme Court

CITATION : R v Laws [2000] NSWSC 885 CURRENT JURISDICTION: Criminal FILE NUMBER(S) : SC 70025/00 HEARING DATE(S) : 5/9/00 JUDGMENT DATE : 5 September 2000

PARTIES : Regina Richard John Sinclair Laws JUDGMENT OF : Wood CJatCL at 1

LOWER COURT Supreme Court JURISDICTION : LOWER COURT 00/11/0086 FILE NUMBER(S) : LOWER COURT JUDICIAL OFFICER :

COUNSEL : M. Tedeschi QC W. Terracini SC with W. Muddle SOLICITORS : DPP Hunt & Hunt DECISION : Sentenced to imprisonment for fifteen months, the execution of which is to be suspended for that period, upon condition of entering into a bond to be of good behaviour for a like period of fifteen months.

THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES CRIMINAL JURISDICTION

WOOD CJ at CL

TUESDAY 5 SEPTEMBER 2000

70025/00 - REGINA V RICHARD JOHN SINCLAIR LAWS

SENTENCE 1 HIS HONOUR: Mr. Laws has been convicted, following a trial by jury, of the offence of soliciting information from a former juror for the purpose of obtaining information on the deliberations of the jury of which she had been a member. The maximum penalty for the offence is imprisonment for seven years (S68A Jury Act 1977). 2 The offence occurred in the following circumstances. The former juror, who was given the pseudonym Mrs Hansen, served as a juror on the trial of Seldon Robinson and Andrew Ly between 14 July and 5 August 1998. On 5 August 1998, after deliberating for three days, the jury returned a verdict of not guilty in relation to the charge of murder of Angelo Cusumano that had been preferred against them. 3 Mrs. Hansen was deeply upset by the verdict, since it was one in which she did not believe and in which she had joined only because she felt that she had been brow beaten to the point where she could not hold out any longer. That night, after returning home, she telephoned the widow of Mr. Cusamano to explain that she had beseeched the jury not to return any verdict, upon the basis that they were unable to agree. She expressed her regret for the outcome and indicated that, in her view, justice had not been done. 4 The fact of this telephone conversation became known to elements of the media, and it was reported in a front page story dealing with the trial, in the Daily Telegraph of 6 August. An editorial, which called for an inquiry, appeared in the same newspaper. By that time there had already been a good deal of concern expressed in relation to the acquittal of the two young men, who had been involved in an armed robbery in company with a third man, in the course of which Mr Cusamano had been shot by that third man. Such was the controversy and concern attaching, that Alan Jones spoke to Mrs. Cusumano during his breakfast programme on Radio Station 2UE. There was a brief mention in this interview, which was entirely permissible at law, of the conversation between her and Mrs. Hansen. The interview mainly concentrated on the shooting and acquittal, and the devastating and tragic consequences for the family of the deceased. 5 Mr. Laws said that he was aware of this controversy which he regarded as the "major news story of the day". He had listened to the Cusumano interview while preparing his own program, and he had skimmed the Daily Telegraph. Coincidentally, a friend of Mr and Mrs Laws, who was also listening to the breakfast programme, realised that the former juror was Mrs. Hansen. She knew that Mrs. Hansen was also a friend of Mr and Mrs Laws. In the course of a telephone conversation with Mrs Laws that followed, she passed that fact on. Mrs Laws then telephoned Mr Laws to advise him of it. He was in the studio at the time either on air, or engaged in recording some commercials. He asked his Personal Assistant, Jodie Borgo, to phone Mrs. Hansen to see if she would speak to him on air. This phone call was placed and when the request was made, Mrs. Hansen agreed to it, provided that it was made clear that the programme had called her and that she had not been the moving party. 6 Within a short time the interview commenced, going to air live. It was introduced in the following manner: "Earlier we were talking about the trial that has caused a stir all over Australia, a Sydney murder trial that's caused enormous repercussions after a woman juror contacted the widow of the slain man in the question [sic]. And she told the widow by telephone that I, quote "justice was not done today." I have found that dissenting juror and she's on the line." 7 After an exchange of greetings, Mr Laws asked: "Tell me exactly how this whole thing transpired. How long did you spend deciding on what should be the outcome of the trial". 8 Thereafter, in response to a number of questions from Mr Laws the story of the jury deliberations unfolded, including disclosures that: