Markets 
Construction boss George Alex’s convictions for money laundering and tax fraud have been quashed and a new trial has been ordered after an appeals court found an “unprecedented” allegation of juror tampering had led to a miscarriage of justice.
George Alex and five co-defendants were found guilty in June 2024 of conspiring to defraud the tax office of more than $10 million after a five-month trial and five weeks of jury deliberations in mid-2024. Alex was sentenced to nine years and three months in jail, while his co-defendants were variously sentenced to eight or eight-and-a-half years.
But they appealed their convictions, claiming it had been tainted by one of the jurors conducting illegal internet searches about Alex’s criminal history that uncovered “highly prejudicial” material. They also claimed that his fellow jurors had been offered bribes to deliver acquittals.
The Court of Criminal Appeal (CCA) found in a judgment delivered on Friday that it was clear the juror had obtained via the illegal searches “abundant information about Mr Alex’s bad character, his having been convicted of making a threat to kill, and his notoriety in relation to trade union corruption allegations made at a royal commission”.
“The jury tampering allegation, made from inside [sic] the jury by Juror G, was unprecedented,” the CCA found.
“Despite the length of the trial, the findings of the sheriff’s report and the trial judge’s careful directions, we have concluded that a miscarriage of justice occurred and that a new trial must be ordered.”
Australian Federal Police officers discovered Juror G’s extensive browsing on Alex three months into the trial when they raided the juror’s home during an unrelated drug investigation. They also learnt from the phone they seized from Juror G that he had been selling drugs to Juror A.
Juror G had been elected foreman on May 9, and some of his fellow jurors would later tell the sheriff that he was part of a louder group on the jury and sometimes drank after court with other jurors.
His numerous internet searches in the early hours of the morning led him to news articles that contained references to murder, mafia, tax cheating, fraud and money laundering in relation to Alex and his associates. The CCA noted that among the “unfavourable epithets” used to describe Alex were “underworld figure” and “a colourful identity with a history of violent associates and links to phoenix companies in the building industry”.
Waiting for the sheriff’s officer to arrive after the raid on his house, Juror G told a federal agent he was not the only juror who had engaged in misconduct and that others “had done worse”. The agent asked what he meant, to which he replied: “Well, what would you do if you got offered something? Be better than having a target on your back.” He told the agent that six jurors had been offered money.
‘The jury tampering allegation, made from inside the jury by Juror G, was unprecedented.’
Court of Criminal Appeal
He went on to tell a sheriff’s officer that Juror A had offered him a financial benefit if he returned a not-guilty verdict and “other members of the jury … [had] been contacted in relation to taking sort of kickbacks as well”.
Asked by the officer whether he had discussed his online discoveries with the other jurors, he replied: “I brought up certain topics to bait some of the others to see whether they bite back.”
Juror A told the sheriff that Juror G had shared with his fellow jurors some information from his searches on how the case at hand was connected to “the bigger picture”.
Juror G and Juror A were consequently discharged from the jury but Supreme Court Justice Des Fagan rejected an application to discharge the entire jury, and the trial was able to continue because it had begun with two spare jurors due to its length.
Alex’s lawyers argued in their appeal that the remaining jurors might have resolved after this incident to deliver guilty verdicts to dispel any suspicion that they had been corrupted.
“If this jury acquitted, all hell would break loose and there would be a full inquiry in relation to the prospect of a bribe,” Tim Game, SC, told the CCA. “That’s not fanciful. That is made front and centre by what’s happened to [Jurors] G and A.”
The CCA noted that the sheriff’s officers told each juror at the start of their interview that the sheriff was investigating possible juror misconduct, cautioned them on their right to silence, and informed them that the interview was being recorded.
“We pause at this point to recognise the impression that these cautions would have likely given each juror,” the judgment said. “We find that each juror the subject of such a caution would have understood that their own conduct was being investigated by the sheriff as possible criminal conduct.”
Two jurors subsequently admitted that Juror G had shared with them the information he learnt from his searches, but the others denied it. They were not told that their foreman had already admitted to sharing the contents of his internet searches.
Asked whether they had been offered a financial incentive for delivering a not-guilty verdict, none of the jurors agreed, but Juror A’s early denials became equivocal as the questioning continued, saying he could not remember because it was so long ago. Two other jurors said it had been mentioned but only as a joke.
The CCA found that the combination of the internet searches, the jury-tampering allegation and a high school connection between Juror A and a solicitor for the defence amounted to a “fundamental or irregularity” in the trial and a substantial miscarriage of justice.
“The consequence of this extraordinary series of events meant that a fair-minded and informed member of the public might reasonably apprehend that the jury might not discharge its function of rendering a verdict according to law.”
Alex and his co-defendants Lindsay Kirschberg, Gordon McAndrew, Pasquale Loccisano and Mark Bryers are currently on bail and face court next month.
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.
From our partners
Read the full article here
