Tootle v R [2017] NSWCCA 103

Court of Criminal Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Tootle v R [2017] NSWCCA 103 Hearing dates: 20 April 2017 Date of orders: 20 April 2017 Decision date: 19 May 2017 Before: Simpson JA at [1]; McCallum J at [66]; Fagan J at [67] Decision: (1) Appeal allowed;

(2) Convictions quashed;

(3) There be a new trial. Catchwords: CRIMINAL LAW – appeal – criminal trial - procedure – juries – jury invited to formulate questions for witnesses – jury given opportunity to formulate questions at the completion of evidence of each witness – questions permitted put to witnesses by Crown prosecutor – encouragement of jury to participate in inquisitorial process – trial process altered in a fundamental respect – miscarriage of justice – observations on criminal trial process – whether miscarriage of justice – appeal allowed

CRIMINAL LAW – appeal – directions – juries – whether direction by trial judge encouraging questions of witnesses from a jury changed the nature of the role of the jury – whether miscarriage of justice resulted – appeal allowed

CRIMINAL LAW – appeal – procedure – juries – whether establishing a process by which a jury can deliberate on questions to witnesses and then have them put changes the nature of the role of the jury – whether miscarriage of justice results – appeal allowed Legislation Cited: Crimes (Sentencing Procedure Act) 1999 (NSW), s 53A Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW), s 6(1) Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW), s 306I Evidence Act 1995 (NSW), s 41 Jury Act 1977 (NSW), s 55F Cases Cited: Krakouer v The Queen (1998) 194 CLR 202; [1998] HCA 43 Lee v The Queen (2014) 253 CLR 455; [2014] HCA 20 Lo Presti v The Queen (1994) 68 ALJR 477 Quartermaine v The Queen (1980) 143 CLR 595; [1980] HCA 29 R v Damic [1982] 2 NSWLR 750 R v Esposito (1998) 45 NSWLR 442 R v Lo Presti [1992] 1 VR 696 R v Mawson [1967] VR 205 R v Pathare [1981] 1 NSWLR 124 Ratten v The Queen (1974) 131 CLR 510; [1974] HCA 35 Re Rattan [1974] VR 201 Sams v R (1990) 46 A Crim R 468 State of Minnesota v Gerard J Costello 646 North Western Reporter, 2d Series 204 (Minn 2002) Weiss v The Queen (2005) 224 CLR 300; [2005] HCA 81 Whitehorn v The Queen (1983) 152 CLR 657; [1983] HCA 42 Wilde v The Queen (1988) 164 CLR 365; [1988] HCA 6 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Mark Tootle (Appellant) Regina (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: N Angelov (Appellant) S Hughes (Respondent)