‘Witness, judge and jury’: Magistrate Evan Hughes’ court contempt decision overturned
“The learned magistrate was in the roles of complainant, prosecutor, witness, judge and jury.” Tasmania’s Supreme Court has weighed into a decision made by a Launceston magistrate.
Police & Courts
Don't miss out on the headlines from Police & Courts. Followed categories will be added to My News.
A Launceston man has successfully waged a legal battle after being convicted and jailed over contempt of court – with a magistrate deemed to have acted in the roles of “complainant, prosecutor, witness, judge and jury”.
Magistrate Evan Hughes charged Lonewolf Brent Shayne Mansell, 21, with contempt of court in September last year.
Mansell had left the courtroom and “banged noisily on a door” after being refused bail on an unrelated matter, with Mr Hughes hearing the noise.
According to a newly published Supreme Court appeal, which ruled in favour of Mansell, Mr Hughes said Mansell had “wilfully misbehaved himself before me” by banging on a door in the Magistrates Court and attempting to damage court property.
He deemed Mansell guilty, and said he’d sentence him in half an hour’s time.
Appeal judge, Chief Justice Alan Blow, said in that half-hour, Mr Hughes prepared and signed a charge of contempt.
Mr Hughes then explained to Mansell that he was being charged for contempt by striking an elevator door, used for the transportation of prisoners.
He noted the lift had become inoperable, trapping Mansell and two security officers inside – with arrangements required to fix the lift and free the trio.
He then jailed Mansell for two months over the contempt.
But Chief Justice Blow said Mr Hughes had “clearly” been informed by someone – potentially in a private conversation – about extra information, that the lift had broken, trapped the people inside, and might need further repairs.
He said Mr Hughes had denied Mansell procedural fairness, by not taking any of a series of steps, including giving Mansell an opportunity to deny the contempt, show cause why he should not be dealt with for contempt, seek legal advice, an adjournment or further particulars, or state whether he pleaded guilty or not guilty.
Chief Justice Blow said it was not clear how Mr Hughes learned the lift had been immobilised or that Mansell and two others had been trapped inside it.
The judge said it could be argued that Mr Hughes might not have brought an “impartial and unprejudiced mind” to conviction and sentencing.
“The learned magistrate might, for example, have been influenced by something not discussed in open court, such as the emotional state of one of the security officers trapped in the lift,” he said.
He said it was open to Mr Hughes to discuss the facts and identify any disputes as to those facts – but he erred by having a private conversation, or privately obtaining information that was not originally within his knowledge.
“The learned magistrate was in the roles of complainant, prosecutor, witness, judge and jury,” Chief Justice Blow said.
The Chief Justice set aside Mansell’s conviction and sentence, and remitted the contempt charge to the Magistrates Court to be heard by a different magistrate.
Mansell ultimately pleaded guilty to contempt and was convicted, but discharged with no penalty.
More Coverage
Changing of the guard for Tasmania’s police dogs
More than 20 new police in the ranks as three unusual suspects graduate from the Tasmanian Police Police Academy. Read why Basil, Tilly and Nikki can go where no cop has gone before.
No seatbelt the ‘most important factor’ in teen’s death
There have been renewed calls for tighter regulations of ATVs after a coroner’s findings into a 14-year-old girl’s death at Bridgewater last year. The changes being recommended.