{ tooltip = 'Copied'; setTimeout(() => tooltip = 'Copy Link', 2000); })" :data-tip="tooltip" class="tooltip tooltip-primary tooltip-bottom" class="cursor-pointer" role="button">
Lindsay v The Queen
Download as PDF
Download as Word
Highlights
My Notes
Collections
Create a New Collection
Overview
Full Text
{ tooltip = 'Copied'; setTimeout(() => tooltip = 'Copy Link', 2000); })" :data-tip="tooltip" class="tooltip tooltip-primary tooltip-bottom" class="cursor-pointer" role="button">
Details
Case
Agency Issuance Number
Published Date
Lindsay v The Queen
[2015] HCA 16
Tags
No tags available
Case
Lindsay v The Queen
[2015] HCA 16
•
HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIAFRENCH CJ,KIEFEL, BELL, KEANE AND NETTLE JJMICHAEL JOSEPH LINDSAY APPELLANTANDTHE QUEEN RESPONDENTLindsay v The Queen[2015] HCA 166 May 2015A24/2014ORDER1.Appeal allowed. 2.Set aside the order of the Court of Criminal Appeal of the Supreme Court of South Australia made on 3 June 2014 and, in its place, order that:(a)the appeal be allowed; (b)the appellant's conviction be quashed; and(c)a new trial be had. On appeal from the Supreme Court of South AustraliaRepresentationM E Shaw QC with B J Doyle for the appellant (instructed by North East Lawyers)M G Hinton QC, Solicitor-General for the State of South Australia with F J McDonald for the respondent (instructed by Director of Public Prosecutions (SA)) Notice: This copy of the Court's Reasons for Judgment is subject to formal revision prior to publication in the Commonwealth Law Reports.CATCHWORDSLindsay v The Queen Criminal law – Murder – Defences – Provocation – Where male Caucasian deceased made sexual advances towards male Aboriginal appellant at appellant's home in presence of appellant's de facto wife and family – Where open to jury to find that appellant killed deceased having lost self-control following advances – Where provocation left to jury at trial and appellant convicted of murder – Where Court of Criminal Appeal ("CCA") dismissed appeal against conviction because it concluded provocation should not have been left to jury as evidence, taken at highest, could not satisfy objective limb of provocation – Whether CCA erred in so concluding – Relevance of contemporary attitudes to sexual relations.Criminal law – Appeal...
Continue reading the full case
Tags
No tags available
Case
Lindsay v The Queen
[2015] HCA 16
•
HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIAFRENCH CJ,KIEFEL, BELL, KEANE AND NETTLE JJMICHAEL JOSEPH LINDSAY APPELLANTANDTHE QUEEN RESPONDENTLindsay v The Queen[2015] HCA 166 May 2015A24/2014ORDER1.Appeal allowed. 2.Set aside the order of the Court of Criminal Appeal of the Supreme Court of South Australia made on 3 June 2014 and, in its place, order that:(a)the appeal be allowed; (b)the appellant's conviction be quashed; and(c)a new trial be had. On appeal from the Supreme Court of South AustraliaRepresentationM E Shaw QC with B J Doyle for the appellant (instructed by North East Lawyers)M G Hinton QC, Solicitor-General for the State of South Australia with F J McDonald for the respondent (instructed by Director of Public Prosecutions (SA)) Notice: This copy of the Court's Reasons for Judgment is subject to formal revision prior to publication in the Commonwealth Law Reports.CATCHWORDSLindsay v The Queen Criminal law – Murder – Defences – Provocation – Where male Caucasian deceased made sexual advances towards male Aboriginal appellant at appellant's home in presence of appellant's de facto wife and family – Where open to jury to find that appellant killed deceased having lost self-control following advances – Where provocation left to jury at trial and appellant convicted of murder – Where Court of Criminal Appeal ("CCA") dismissed appeal against conviction because it concluded provocation should not have been left to jury as evidence, taken at highest, could not satisfy objective limb of provocation – Whether CCA erred in so concluding – Relevance of contemporary attitudes to sexual relations.Criminal law – Appeal...
showFlash = false, 6000)"
>