Audit of Queensland murder trials
Published Wednesday, 18 July, 2007 at 05:29 PM
Attorney-General and Minister for Justice and Minister Assisting the Premier in Western Queensland
The Honourable Kerry Shine
Queensland murder trials will be audited to assess the operation of the long-established defence of provocation in the State’s criminal laws, Attorney-General Kerry Shine said today.
Mr Shine said he had commissioned the audit of these trials, initially over the last five years, following a Brisbane Supreme Court jury’s decision last month to acquit Damian Karl Sebo of the charge of murder relating to the death of Taryn Hunt in September 2005.
“The case has highlighted the operation of the limited defence of provocation under Section 304* of the Criminal Code 1899,” Mr Shine said.
Mr Shine said the audit of murder cases for the provocation defence was part of the audit he had already ordered into the so-called “accident defence” in the Code.
“The accident defence (under Section 23 of the Code) was highlighted by jury acquittals of the defendants in the trials relating to the death of two young men, David Stevens and Nigel Lee,” Mr Shine said.
“The audit is being conducted by the Department of Justice and Attorney-General. The audit will detail how often these defences have been used, the nature of the use and for what outcome.”
“I want the audit to be completed, so I can consult stakeholders, including the judiciary, legal profession and victims’ groups, about the results and gauge their feedback.”
“To fast-track this, I have asked the Department to undertake the audit of cases over the last five years in the first instance.”
Mr Shine said he had no proposal, at this stage, to amend the current defences.
“To remove these defences would be to deny it to all defendants in all circumstances,” Mr Shine said.
“The audit will ensure we assess how these two defences have operated in practice in Queensland courtrooms in recent years.”
*Section 304 of the Criminal Code 1899 states:
“When a person who unlawfully kills another under circumstances which, but for the provisions of this section, would constitute murder, does the act which causes death in the heat of passion caused by sudden provocation, and before there is time for the person's passion to cool, the person is guilty of manslaughter only.”
18 July 2007
Media contact: Kirby Anderson 3239 6400 or 0418 197 350