R v Playford

In this matter the appellant had been found guilty of murder.  He had been interviewed by the police and participated in a re-enactment in the course of which he made comprehensive admissions.  The question before the Court was whether or not statements in the nature of a confession were “voluntary”?  The appellant alleged that threats had been made to him and inducements offered which caused him to confess as he did.  It was alleged by the appellant that the police had offered to and had arranged a visit from his family if he confessed to the killings.  On the issue of voluntariness Dalton J wrote the leading judgment.  Her Honour found that the requirements for excluding evidence as not being voluntary were not satisfied.  The next issue was whether or not the evidence should have been excluded by the unfairness discretion or on the grounds of public policy taking into account the manner in which the confessions were obtained.  The President (with whom White JA agreed) held that although there had been a failure by the police to comply with the Police Powers and Responsibilities Act and the regulations thereto and that the conduct of the police was “grossly unsatisfactory”, there was no basis for interfering with the discretion to admit the confessions.  Dalton J held that the questions of whether or not to exclude evidence on the grounds of public policy or on the grounds of individual unfairness were separate questions which a judge had to consider separately.  The President and White JA took the opposite view.