There is no suggestion that any of the police officers, prosecutors or members of the press behaved inappropriately or attempted to influence the jury.
But a former senior judge has called the situation “highly irregular” and a potential ground for appeal.
“No one else connected with the case should have been staying in the same accommodation,” the former judge said.
Emails obtained from the Supreme Court of Victoria suggest Beale was not informed of the circumstances at the hotel for up to six days. The emails were released with the permission of Beale.
The email chain shows the defence was not told about the arrangement for another two days, only about two hours before the jury returned its guilty verdict against Patterson on July 7.
The accommodation arrangement also caused divisions within the Office of Public Prosecutions, with Crown prosecutors moving accommodation while at least two OPP solicitors kept their booking.
Once Beale was informed, he labelled the situation “obviously undesirable” in an email to prosecutors and the defence several days later. The OPP solicitors and the lead homicide investigator in the case checked out of the hotel soon after, they said.
‘No one else connected with the case should have been staying in the same accommodation.’
Former senior judge
However, the OPP did not inform the court that at least another two members of the homicide squad had also been staying at the hotel during part of the jury’s deliberations, according to the emails. No mention was made by the OPP or the jury keepers about the presence of the media at the hotel.
The OPP, Victoria Police and the court have all declined to comment. All three parties insist there was never any interaction between their staff and the jury.
This masthead understands that the notification to Beale was sparked after the jury had been dropped off at their hotel on Friday, July 4, and came face to face with reporters and OPP staff members checking into the hotel.
The jury had to be temporarily isolated in a conference room next to the lobby as prosecutors and journalists cleared out of the area, a source familiar with the arrangements said.
The next day, a jury keeper notified Beale, at least in part, about the circumstances at the hotel.
But the information was not passed on to the defence for almost 48 hours. The jury had been deliberating that same day, a Saturday.
“On Saturday afternoon, I was informed by my Tipstaff that the informant and two prosecution solicitors have been staying at the same hotel as the jury,” Beale’s associate emailed the defence and prosecution at 8.26am on Monday, July 7. “He also told me that there has been no interaction between them and the jury. The jury have had a separate floor to themselves and have eaten their meals in a conference room separate from other guests of the hotel. But all guests use the same entrance at the hotel.
Loading
“Coincidentally, on Saturday night, the jurors moved to a different hotel in a different town where they will be staying for the rest of this week.
“I understand that there is a shortage of accommodation in the district, but it is obviously undesirable for any of the parties or the informant to be staying at the same hotel as the jury.”
The OPP replied about two hours later, at 11.13am.
“We confirm that the informant was staying at that hotel for the duration of the trial, and we only became aware last Thursday that the jury had commenced staying there. He believed he was staying in a different wing of the hotel and was using a different entrance, and he took steps to avoid common areas from the point that he became aware that they were there.
“In relation to the prosecution solicitors, the prosecution team’s usual accommodation was no longer available for our use as of Friday last week, so we had booked that hotel for the Friday night for prosecution counsel and solicitors. When we became aware that the jury were staying there, we attempted to move everyone but, due to availability issues in the area, we were only able to move counsel. We confirm that the prosecution solicitors did not interact with the jury at any stage and also took steps to avoid any incidental contact in common areas.
“The informant and prosecution team are no longer staying at that hotel.”
But the OPP did not tell Beale in that email that other members of the homicide squad had been staying at the hotel that week, nor that up to seven journalists were also present at the hotel.
About two hours later, the jury came back with guilty verdicts.
Patterson’s defence team, who did not respond to a request for comment when contacted by this masthead, did not reply to or acknowledge either of the emails from the judge or OPP.
Loading
It is unclear how significant this incident could be to Patterson’s expected appeal.
Veteran barrister Robert Richter said that while a successful appeal was unlikely without proving there was some kind of interaction between the jury and the media, police or prosecutors, the appearance it created was problematic.
“It is often about not just whether justice was done but did it appear to be done? The question of appearances always arises on issues of bias.”
At the start of the trial, Beale had warned jurors that it was “not a good look if there’s any interaction between jurors and members of the respective legal teams”.
“When you’re outside at lunchtime or at other times, your paths may cross with some of the lawyers – both legal teams. If they ignore you, don’t think they’re being rude. They’re supposed to ignore you. That’s because, as I said to you earlier, justice must not only be done, it must be seen to be done …
“Also, don’t get into conversation with people you don’t know around the court … The media interest in this case has been intense, and you might find someone approaches you and starts to engage you in conversation and, before you know it, they might be trying to draw you out because they’re associated with the media.
“Or it might be someone who’s associated with the accused or with the family members of the deceased. I’m not suggesting that people would do anything wrong, but err on the side of caution: don’t get drawn – don’t have conversations with people you don’t know.”
Start the day with a summary of the day’s most important and interesting stories, analysis and insights. Sign up for our Morning Edition newsletter.
Read the full article here
