Makin v Attorney General for New South Wales

Last updated

Makin v Attorney General for New South Wales
Royal Arms of the United Kingdom (Privy Council).svg
Court Judicial Committee of the Privy Council
Full case name(1) John Makin, and (2) Sarah Makin v Attorney General for New South Wales
Decided
  • 22 July 1893 appeal dismissed
  • 12 December 1893 reasons published
Citation(s) [1893] UKPC 56, [1894]  AC  57
Case history
Prior action(s)R v Makin [1893] NSWLawRp 28, (1893) 14  LR (NSW)  1
Appealed from Supreme Court (Full Court)
Court membership
Judges sitting Lord Herschell LC, Lord Watson, Lord Halsbury, Lord Ashbourne, Lord Macnaghten, Lord Morris, Lord Shand
Case opinions
Decision byLord Herschell LC
Keywords
similar fact evidence

Makin v Attorney General for New South Wales [1] is a significant 1893 decision of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council which gave rise to the modern common law rule of similar fact evidence. [2] [3]

Contents

Background

A husband and wife, John and Sarah Makin, were baby farmers. A one-month-old child died within 2 days after being given to them; they were charged with murdering the child and burying it in their backyard. During their trial, evidence of twelve other babies found buried in the backyards of their previous residences was offered. On 9 March 1893 both were convicted, and it was recommended that Sarah Makin be shown mercy. [4] The trial judge stated a special case for the opinion of a Full Court of the Supreme Court of NSW, which heard the appeal on 23 March and handed down their decision on 30 March 1893, holding that the similar fact evidence was properly admitted. [5] Immediately following the Full Court's decision, Stephen J sentenced both John and Sarah Makin to death by hanging. [6] Sarah Makin's sentence was commuted to life imprisonment before the appeal to the Privy Council. [7]

The appeal to the Privy Council was based on whether this evidence was admissible or whether it was unfairly prejudicial to their defence. [3]

Opinion of the Court

At the close of arguments on 22 July 1893 the Privy Council announced that its advice was that the appeal should be dismissed, [8] and its reasons were published on 12 December 1893. [1]

Lord Herschell held that the evidence, in this case, was admissible, however, as a general rule evidence of a past similar event should not be admissible unless there were exceptional circumstances. [2]

It is undoubtedly not competent for the prosecution to adduce evidence tending to show that the accused has been guilty of criminal acts other than those covered by the indictment, for the purpose of leading to the conclusion that the accused is a person likely from his criminal conduct or character to have committed the offence for which he is being tried. On the other hand, the mere fact that the evidence adduced tends to show the commission of other crimes does not render it inadmissible if it be relevant to an issue before the jury, and it may be so relevant if it bears upon the question whether the acts alleged to constitute the crime charged in the indictment were designed or accidental, or to rebut a defence which would otherwise be open to the accused. The statement of these general principles is easy, but it is obvious that it may often be very difficult to draw the line and to decide whether a particular piece of evidence is on the one side or the other. [1]

Evidence of similar facts can only be admitted both if it is relevant, and its probative value outweighs any prejudicial effect.

Aftermath

A plea for clemency for John Makin, [9] was denied and he was hanged at Darlinghurst Gaol on 15 August 1893. [10]

Extraterritoriality

The court also delivered an opinion that colonial legislatures did not have the power to pass laws with extraterritorial effect: [11]

Their Lordships think it right to add that they are of the opinion that if the wider construction had been applied to the statute, and it was supposed that it was intended thereby to comprehend cases so wide as those insisted on at the bar, it would have been beyond the competence of the Colony to enact such a law. Their jurisdiction is confined within their own territories, and the maxim which has been more than once quoted, 'Extra territorium jus dicenti impune non paretur,' would be applicable to such a case.

The question was already uncertain prior to this, and as an obiter dictum the opinion was not binding; nevertheless it had a chilling effect on Dominion legislatures' willingness to pass extraterritorial laws until the Statute of Westminster 1931 explicitly stated that they had the power to do so. [12]

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Garfield Barwick</span> 7th Chief Justice of Australia and politician (1903-1997)

Sir Garfield Edward John Barwick, was an Australian judge who was the seventh and longest serving Chief Justice of Australia, in office from 1964 to 1981. He had earlier been a Liberal Party politician, serving as a minister in the Menzies government from 1958 to 1964.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Hearing (law)</span> Court proceeding

In law, a hearing is a proceeding before a court or other decision-making body or officer, such as a government agency or a legislative committee.

The Sydney Twelve were members of the Industrial Workers of the World arrested on 23 September 1916 in Sydney, Australia, and charged with treason under the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) which incorporated the Treason Felony Act 1848 (Imp). They were John Hamilton, Peter Larkin, Joseph Fagin, William Teen, Donald Grant, Benjamin King, Thomas Glynn, Donald McPherson, Thomas Moore, Charles Reeve, William Beattie, and Bob Besant. The treason charges were dropped prior to trial and replaced with three conspiracy charges: (1) conspiracy to commit arson (2) conspiracy to procure the release of Tom Barker from gaol by unlawful means and (3) conspiracy to excite sedition.

The law of evidence, also known as the rules of evidence, encompasses the rules and legal principles that govern the proof of facts in a legal proceeding. These rules determine what evidence must or must not be considered by the trier of fact in reaching its decision. The trier of fact is a judge in bench trials, or the jury in any cases involving a jury. The law of evidence is also concerned with the quantum (amount), quality, and type of proof needed to prevail in litigation. The rules vary depending upon whether the venue is a criminal court, civil court, or family court, and they vary by jurisdiction.

Crown prosecutors are the public prosecutors in the legal system of Australia. In Western Australia, they are referred to as State prosecutors.

The Whiskey Au Go Go fire was a fire that occurred at 2.08 am on Thursday 8 March 1973, in the Whiskey Au Go Go nightclub in Fortitude Valley, Brisbane, Australia that killed 15 people.

Hearsay, in a legal forum, is an out-of-court statement which is being offered in court for the truth of what was asserted. In most courts, hearsay evidence is inadmissible unless an exception to the hearsay rule applies.

The hearsay provisions of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 reformed the common law relating to the admissibility of hearsay evidence in criminal proceedings begun on or after 4 April 2005.

In the law of evidence, a dying declaration is testimony that would normally be barred as hearsay but may in common law nonetheless be admitted as evidence in criminal law trials because it constituted the last words of a dying person. The rationale is that someone who is dying or believes death to be imminent would have less incentive to fabricate testimony, and as such, the hearsay statement carries with it some reliability.

Margaret Mary Cunneen is an Australian barrister, prosecutor and commissioner of a government inquiry.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Julian Salomons</span> Australian politician

Sir Julian Emanuel Salomons was a barrister, royal commissioner, Solicitor General, Chief Justice and member of parliament. He was the only Chief Justice of New South Wales to be appointed and resign before he was ever sworn into office. Salomons was said to be short of stature and somewhat handicapped by defective eyesight. However, he had great industry, great powers of analysis, a keen intellect and unbounded energy and pertinacity. His wit and readiness were proverbial, and he was afraid of no judge.

Relevance, in the common law of evidence, is the tendency of a given item of evidence to prove or disprove one of the legal elements of the case, or to have probative value to make one of the elements of the case likelier or not. Probative is a term used in law to signify "tending to prove". Probative evidence "seeks the truth". Generally in law, evidence that is not probative is inadmissible and the rules of evidence permit it to be excluded from a proceeding or stricken from the record "if objected to by opposing counsel". A balancing test may come into the picture if the value of the evidence needs to be weighed versus its prejudicial nature.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">John and Sarah Makin</span> Australian couple convicted of murder

John Sidney Makin and Sarah Jane Makin were Australian 'baby farmers' who were convicted in New South Wales for the murder of infant Horace Murray. The couple answered a series of advertisements from unmarried mothers seeking adoption of their babies, taking on the care of the infants on payment of a "premium". The remains of fifteen infants were found by police buried in the yards of houses where the Makins had resided. The couple were tried and found guilty in March 1893 and both were sentenced to death, though Sarah Makin's sentence was commuted to life imprisonment. After an unsuccessful appeal, which was confirmed by the Privy Council in Britain, John Makin was hanged on 15 August 1893. Sarah Makin served her sentence at Bathurst and Sydney. After eighteen-and-a-half years she was released in April 1911 when her daughters petitioned for her early release.

The role of expert witnesses in English law is to give explanations of difficult or technical topics in civil and criminal trials, to assist the fact finding process. The extent to which authorities have been allowed to testify, and on what topics, has been debated, and to this end a variety of criteria have evolved throughout English case law.

Gregory James King was a New Zealand criminal defence lawyer and broadcaster. He has been described as "one of this country's finest legal brains".

The South African law of evidence forms part of the adjectival or procedural law of that country. It is based on English common law.

Members of the New South Wales Legislative Council who served from 1930 to 1932 were appointed for life by the Governor on the advice of the Premier. This list includes members between the 1930 state election on 25 October 1930 and the 1932 state election on 11 June 1932. The President was Sir John Peden. The Premier Jack Lang had been seeking to swamp the council, however the Governor Sir Philip Game had declined to do so in November 1930, March, June and September 1931 when Lang sought 70 new members be appointed. In November 1931 Lang dropped his request to 25 new members and the governor agreed to the request. This raised the number of members of the council from 85 to 110.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Solicitor General for New South Wales</span> Second law officer for the state of New South Wales, Australia

Solicitor General for New South Wales, known informally as the Solicitor General, is one of the Law Officers of the Crown, and the deputy of the Attorney General. They can exercise the powers of the Attorney General in the Attorney General's absence. The Solicitor General acts alongside the Crown Advocate, and Crown Solicitor, and serves as one of the legal and constitutional advisers of the Crown and its government in the Australian state of New South Wales.

A by-election was held for the New South Wales Legislative Assembly electorate of Blayney on 12 January 1907 because Paddy Crick (Progressive) resigned from Parliament after findings of corruption made by a Royal Commission. Crick had also been expelled from the Legislative Assembly for outrageous behaviour in the chamber, however he was returned in the resulting by-election.

References

Sources

Citations

  1. 1 2 3 Makin v Attorney General for New South Wales [1893] UKPC 56 , [1894] AC 57(12 December 1893), Privy Council (on appeal from NSW).
  2. 1 2 Malek Hodge (2010). Phipson on Evidence (17th ed.). Sweet & Maxwell. 19-17.
  3. 1 2 Ian Dennis (2007). The Law of Evidence (3rd ed.). Sweet & Maxwell. 18.21.
  4. "Central Criminal Court - Thursday". The Sydney Morning Herald . 10 March 1893. p. 3 via National Library of Australia.
  5. R v Makin [1893] NSWLawRp 28 , (1893) 14 LR (NSW) 1(30 March 1893), Supreme Court (Full Court) (NSW, Australia).
  6. "Central Criminal Court - The Makin case - passing sentence of death". The Sydney Morning Herald . 31 March 1893. p. 3 via National Library of Australia.
  7. "The baby-farming". The Sydney Morning Herald . 17 April 1893. p. 7 via National Library of Australia.
  8. "The Sydney Infanticides". The Argus (Melbourne) . No. 14, 687. Victoria, Australia. 24 July 1893. p. 5. Retrieved 7 October 2017 via National Library of Australia.
  9. "The condemned man Makin". The Sydney Morning Herald . 12 August 1893. p. 7 via National Library of Australia.
  10. "Execution of John Makin". The Sydney Morning Herald . 16 August 1893. p. 7 via National Library of Australia.
  11. [1891] A.C. 455 at 458; cited in Mohr 2005 p.90
  12. Mohr 2005 pp.89, 100