Trial by Motive

This article examines the implications of the High Court ruling in The Queen v Baden-Clay(‘Baden-Clay’)1 for future murder accused with strong motives for killing their spouses who deny all knowledge of their deaths. The article argues that apart from underlining t...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: David Field
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Bond University 2017-01-01
Series:Bond Law Review
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.53300/001c.5652
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1849731439412641792
author David Field
author_facet David Field
author_sort David Field
collection DOAJ
description This article examines the implications of the High Court ruling in The Queen v Baden-Clay(‘Baden-Clay’)1 for future murder accused with strong motives for killing their spouses who deny all knowledge of their deaths. The article argues that apart from underlining the risk run by any criminal accused who opts to remain silent at their trial, the reasoning of the Court has left open the possibility that a conviction of murder could become a ‘default’ verdict under Queensland law in the absence of clear evidence of manslaughter, once the act of homicide has been proved. It has also provided a ‘pro-Crown’ precedent for future cases in which a conviction may be obtained by means of items of purely circumstantial evidence, not all of which are established beyond reasonable doubt.
format Article
id doaj-art-7b759e7defea4e669aa850f6406f94af
institution DOAJ
issn 1033-4505
2202-4824
language English
publishDate 2017-01-01
publisher Bond University
record_format Article
series Bond Law Review
spelling doaj-art-7b759e7defea4e669aa850f6406f94af2025-08-20T03:08:32ZengBond UniversityBond Law Review1033-45052202-48242017-01-0129210.53300/001c.5652Trial by MotiveDavid FieldThis article examines the implications of the High Court ruling in The Queen v Baden-Clay(‘Baden-Clay’)1 for future murder accused with strong motives for killing their spouses who deny all knowledge of their deaths. The article argues that apart from underlining the risk run by any criminal accused who opts to remain silent at their trial, the reasoning of the Court has left open the possibility that a conviction of murder could become a ‘default’ verdict under Queensland law in the absence of clear evidence of manslaughter, once the act of homicide has been proved. It has also provided a ‘pro-Crown’ precedent for future cases in which a conviction may be obtained by means of items of purely circumstantial evidence, not all of which are established beyond reasonable doubt.https://doi.org/10.53300/001c.5652
spellingShingle David Field
Trial by Motive
Bond Law Review
title Trial by Motive
title_full Trial by Motive
title_fullStr Trial by Motive
title_full_unstemmed Trial by Motive
title_short Trial by Motive
title_sort trial by motive
url https://doi.org/10.53300/001c.5652
work_keys_str_mv AT davidfield trialbymotive