The days of juries agonising until they can reach a unanimous verdict are over, as from today judges can accept an 11-to-one decision.
It is part of major reforms to the justice system.
But many lawyers are not happy.
After three days of futile deliberation in the trial of antique dealer John Barlow, the judge let the jury go.
A costly re-trial was held – only for it to end the same way. He was found guilty after the third trial.
But, as of today, the jury does not have to come to a unanimous verdict, 11-to-one is good enough.
“We can’t afford in the criminal justice system to have constant retrials,” says Justice Minister Simon Power.
We are following the lead of England. In most of the United States a unanimous verdict is still required, while in Australia all states except the ACT accept majority verdicts for some crimes.
Depositions hearings have also changed. These were used to decide whether a case should go to trial.
Witnesses had to give evidence, often recalling distressing details – if the trial went ahead they had to do it all over again. Not any more.
“Victims of crime will have one less traumatic experience to have to go through,” says Mr Power.
But a leading defence lawyer says it will harm innocent people.
“The doing away with depositions is based on cost savings,” says Barrister Marie Dyhrberg.
“But the cost will simply be put at the other end and many people will stand trial now, when they never should have.”
National MP Chester Borrows is also strongly opposed to his own government’s action.
“There is a real danger that there will be protracted trials,” says XXX Chester Borrows.
“They will be extended and those that go to trial will be costlier.”
Opponents of the changes to deposition hearings say all sorts of evidence comes out that the defence lawyers would not otherwise know about until the trial begins.
At the very least they wanted the changes postponed, but instead there will be a review in two years.
3 News