Cardinal Pell's appeal to the High Court of Australia: challenging the limits of a defendant's right to appeal the facts of a criminal conviction

Edward Henry QC, Christopher Gray

Research output: Contribution to journalComment/debate (Academic Journal)

Abstract

Discusses the approach of the Australian High Court in Pell v The Queen, in which it quashed a cardinal's conviction for historic sexual assault. Contrasts the UK position in R. v SJ (CA) which held a jury's belief in the complainant's credibility to be determinative, rather than peripheral. Discusses the human rights arguments for extending the right of criminal appeal from jury findings on grounds including the right to a fair trial.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)317-329
JournalEuropean Human Rights Law Review
Volume2020
Issue number4
Publication statusPublished - 2020

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Cardinal Pell's appeal to the High Court of Australia: challenging the limits of a defendant's right to appeal the facts of a criminal conviction'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

  • Cite this