Wilfully obstructing the course of justice (Section 117(e) Crimes Act 1961)

[Note: This question trail assumes the following scenario: Mr Smith was due to go on trial for burglary on Tuesday 10 April 2019 for burgling Ms Jones’ home. On 1 April 2019, Mr Smith broke into the local Crown Solicitor’s office and destroyed ten computers which contained inculpatory evidence against Mr Smith.]

Charge 1: Wilfully obstructing the course of justice under section 117(e) of the Crimes Act 1961

The Crown must prove each element of the offence. That is called the burden of proof. The Crown carries that burden. Also, the Crown must prove each element beyond reasonable doubt. This is called the standard of proof. It means that you must be sure that each element is proved.

1.	Are you sure that Mr Smith broke into the Crown Solicitor’s office and destroyed ten computers?
	If no, find Mr Smith not guilty. If yes, go to question two.
2.	Are you sure that when Mr Smith broke into the Crown Solicitor’s office he knew that legal proceedings against him had begun?
	If no, find Mr Smith not guilty. If yes, go to question three.
3.	Are you sure that Mr Smith, in destroying the computers, intended to prevent a court from doing justice?
	“Preventing a court from doing justice” means actions which have the tendency to negatively affect the effective and fair conduct of existing or contemplated judicial proceedings. If no, find Mr Smith not guilty. If yes, find Mr Smith guilty.