Regina V Bowden Report
Introduction
This report details the observations made in the closing statement of Regina v Bowden before Judge McEwen. The rape charge held against Bowden placed this case within the Criminal Jurisdiction of the South Australian District Court (Courtroom Five).
Issues of Fact & Law
The predominant legal issues that arose in the closing statement of the trial were pertinent to the Criminal Law Consolidation Act 1935 (SA). The defence cited section 75 of the Act to permit the jury to deliver an alternative verdict to the charge of rape, whereby:
If … the jury—
a) is not satisfied that the accused is guilty of the offence charged; but
b) is satisfied that the accused is guilty of an indecent assault or a common assault, or an attempt to commit indecent assault or a common assault (the "lesser offence"), the jury …show more content…
The barristers referred to each other as ‘my learned friend’, ‘the defence’ or ‘the prosecution’. They stood while addressing the judge and called him ‘your Honour’. When talking to the jury they said ‘ladies and gentlemen’, and occasionally said it in full i.e. ‘ladies and gentlemen of the jury’. While the jury was present, the barristers addressed them, rather than the judge. The judge did not interrupt and remained completely impartial. This is because rather than deciding whether or not the accused is guilty, it is the judge's role to decide any issues of law, and to ensure proper procedure is followed. Before calling the jury into hear the closing statements, the judge confirmed with the barrister that it was an agreed fact that penetration had occurred between the complainant and the accused. Then, towards the end of the defence’s closing statement, he implied that that the jury could not know for certain that penetration had occurred. Once the jury had left, the judge admonished the barrister and told him that he should ‘reign in [his]
This report details the observations made in the closing statement of Regina v Bowden before Judge McEwen. The rape charge held against Bowden placed this case within the Criminal Jurisdiction of the South Australian District Court (Courtroom Five).
Issues of Fact & Law
The predominant legal issues that arose in the closing statement of the trial were pertinent to the Criminal Law Consolidation Act 1935 (SA). The defence cited section 75 of the Act to permit the jury to deliver an alternative verdict to the charge of rape, whereby:
If … the jury—
a) is not satisfied that the accused is guilty of the offence charged; but
b) is satisfied that the accused is guilty of an indecent assault or a common assault, or an attempt to commit indecent assault or a common assault (the "lesser offence"), the jury …show more content…
The barristers referred to each other as ‘my learned friend’, ‘the defence’ or ‘the prosecution’. They stood while addressing the judge and called him ‘your Honour’. When talking to the jury they said ‘ladies and gentlemen’, and occasionally said it in full i.e. ‘ladies and gentlemen of the jury’. While the jury was present, the barristers addressed them, rather than the judge. The judge did not interrupt and remained completely impartial. This is because rather than deciding whether or not the accused is guilty, it is the judge's role to decide any issues of law, and to ensure proper procedure is followed. Before calling the jury into hear the closing statements, the judge confirmed with the barrister that it was an agreed fact that penetration had occurred between the complainant and the accused. Then, towards the end of the defence’s closing statement, he implied that that the jury could not know for certain that penetration had occurred. Once the jury had left, the judge admonished the barrister and told him that he should ‘reign in [his]