R v Iaria and Panozzo [2004] VSC 96
[2004] VSC 96
At a glance
Source factsCourt
Supreme Court of Victoria
Decision date
2004-03-23
Before
NETTLE J
Source
Original judgment source is linked above.
Judgment (20 paragraphs)
- For the reasons already given, I am also of the view that it overstates the burden that lies upon an applicant for a change of venue to say that the venue will not be altered unless the court is satisfied that there is a reasonable possibility that the applicant will not have a fair and impartial trial and that the discretion although wide is not lightly to be exercised.
- Like Cussen J in Cording v Trembath and Starke J in R v Forsyth and Lanson I am not prepared to say in this case that a proper trial would not be possible before a jury in the district in which the events in issue are alleged to have occurred. But now, even more than 80 years ago, it is desirable to go further than that, to ensure not only that a fair trial would be had in fact, "but that it should be had in such circumstances that all reasonable men would so admit". For again to invoke the observations of Brennan J in Jago, even if judicial measures cannot always secure perfect justice to an accused, the legal right of an accused truly stated is a right to a trial as fair as the courts can make it.