In this project, we learnt about the principles of justice that uphold Australia’s legal system and were asked to outline and explain the principles of justice explain how those principles of justice were both supported and compromised in your chosen case and note the main facts of your chosen case in an appropriate note-taking format. We were also asked to give a written validation on the question, with reference to a case you have studied, evaluate the extent to which justice has been upheld, in form of an essay and publish it onto our e-portfolios.

About the case

Lloyd Rayney was a well know Perth barrister working on some of WA’s most popular cases. His wife Corryn Rayney was a respected registrar at the Supreme Court of Western Australia before she was murdered. On the 7th of August 2007, Corryn disappeared after attending a boot-scooting class. Her body was found a week later buried in one of Perth’s most popular attractions, Kings Park. Found a few meters away from the body was a name tag with Lloyd’s name on it. This is what first lead the police to believe it was Lloyd Rayney that had committed the murder. Lloyd was taken to a judge-only court in 2012 and was found not guilty.

About the principles of justice

The principles of justice are guidelines for conducting justice. There are a number of principles that are designed to help protect the rights of all Australian citizens. Australia’s legal system is based on the common law legal system. Common-Law is the law created by decisions of judges, which act as binding precedents for later decisions. These principles are important because they are the steppingstones to protecting the rights of citizens. A few examples of these principles are everyone is equal before the law, the presumption of innocence, everyone has the right to a fair hearing, and the judiciary is independent and impartial and high-quality evidence. These principles demonstrate equality, fairness, and access. Through an investigation of the Lloyd Rayney case, you will see how these principles were compromised and/or supported.

Everyone is equal before the law and the presumption of innocence

The Rayney case involved a few principles that were compromised and supported. The principle everyone is equal before the law and the presumption of innocence were compromised in the Lloyd Rayney case. The principle everyone is equal before the law refers to how everyone is treated entirely fairly before any law authorities get involved and the presumption of innocence refers to how everyone is presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt. Two days after Corryn Rayney’s body was found, both the police and the city of Perth had decided that Lloyd was guilty of the murder of his wife. A few examples to support this claim is Lloyd Rayney was declared as the prime and only suspect before any high-quality evidence was found, and 96% of all surveillance hours were spent following Rayney and his friends and family. These examples demonstrate that the principle of everyone is equal before the law and the presumption of innocence were compromised in the Rayney case and the city of Perth had decided that Lloyd was the murderer of his wife.

Right to a fair hearing the judiciary is independent and impartial.

Another element of the Lloyd Rayney case is the fact that he had a judge-only trial. The principles of everyone has the right to a fair hearing and the judiciary is independent and impartial was supported in the case of Lloyd Rayney. The principle everyone has the right to a fair hearing refers to how everyone is innocent until proven guilty and you are entitled to legal defence and you are allowed to not have a jury if you can prove it would be biased whereas the principle of the judiciary is independent and impartial refers to how the judiciary has to make a decision based on the facts that they know are correct and that has been stated in the trial. These principles were supported because Rayney was given a judge-only trial and the judge came from interstate. This is because the case was very well known around his area, and everyone believed he did it and evidence for this is a quote from Mr Rayney in a 60 minutes documentary that says “I remember I had caught a taxi because the police had taken my car away and the taxi driver had the news on. I remember the taxi driver shaking his head and saying ‘ah, the husband did it. He hadn’t recognised me, but he was convinced by what had been reported.” This is just one of the many examples that prove that he would not have gotten a fair trial if there was a jury from his area. The judiciary is independent and impartial was supported because the judge came in from interstate and therefore didn’t know much about the case so could only make decisions solely based on what was stated in the trial. As a result of this, it can be shown that the principles of everyone has the right to a fair hearing and the judiciary is independent and impartial were supported as Lloyd Rayney was given a judge-only trial and the judge had come from interstate.

High-quality evidence

The final element of the Lloyd Rayney case was the fact that the evidence provided that supported that Lloyd committed the crime was not of high quality. The principle of high-quality evidence was compromised in the Lloyd Rayney case. This principle refers to how all evidence that is found must be reliable and can be proved to be correct, for example, DNA, eyewitnesses, security footage, fingerprints, etc. All the evidence found and provided by officers was circumstantial and evidence was heavily focused on Rayney and nobody else even though there were clear potential suspects and a lot of the evidence found was presumed to be planted. An example of this is the fact that there was the same sand in kings park found in a well know prosecutor’s car and he lived near the area where Corryn Rayney’s body was found. This neglected the principle of high-quality evidence because there wasn’t much reliable evidence and it wasn’t proved to be correct.

Conculsion

Drawing to a close, the principles of justice are guidelines for conducting justice that were designed to help protect the rights of all Australian citizens. There are a number of principles, such as everyone is equal before the law, the presumption of innocence, everyone has the right to a fair hearing, the judiciary is independent and impartial and high-quality evidence, that were both neglected and supported in the case of Lloyd Rayney. 

Didn’t get enough from reading? Listen to a podcast here.

Still want to know more? Watch a video about the case here.