Inclusive Juries—Access for People who are Deaf, Hard of Hearing, Blind or Have Low Vision: Consultation Paper (html)

8. Possible supports to enable inclusive juries

8.1 This chapter provides an overview of current supports that may assist people in the subject groups to serve on juries in Victoria. We seek community feedback on what supports would best help people to serve and how to make the delivery of those supports tailored to individual needs.

8.2 Australian courts already offer a range of supports for court users with hearing and vision disabilities, such as witnesses and parties. The Victorian Disability Access Bench Book, designed for all judicial officers in all Victorian courts and tribunals, provides guidance on the kinds of adjustments that may be required.[1] The courts routinely provide accessible materials, interpreters and hearing aids.

8.3 Some existing supports might need to be expanded to encompass the needs of jurors who are deaf, hard of hearing, blind or who have low vision. Advances in technology have led to a proliferation of accessibility tools for people who are blind, have low vision, are deaf, or hearing impaired. The pace and sophistication of technological change means that new and emerging supports may eventually become integrated into the court system as well.

People who are deaf or hard of hearing

Supports currently offered by Australian courts

8.4 People who are deaf or hard of hearing may currently use hearing loops, Auslan interpreters, support people, and captioning systems to participate in Victorian court proceedings.

Auslan interpreters

8.5 Australian Sign Language (Auslan) enables deaf and hard of hearing people to communicate and participate in society. Auslan is a visual form of language that uses hand, arm and body movements to covey meaning.[2]

8.6 The Commission understands that in the court context Auslan interpreters generally work in pairs in approximately 20-minute shifts. This would mean that two interpreters might need to assist in trials and deliberations, making it 14 (not 13) people in the jury room. If a trial was expected to be lengthy, a third interpreter might be needed to reduce the burden on the interpreters.

Certification and training

8.7 Auslan interpreters are regulated by the National Accreditation Authority for Translators and Interpreters (NAATI).[3] The three levels of NAATI proficiency are:

• entry level Certified Provisional Interpreter

• Certified Interpreter

• Certified Conference Interpreter.

8.8 The Victorian Government Policy on Interpreters requires legal interpreters to have a minimum qualification level of Certified Interpreter. They must have completed three years of work experience and undergo professional development training.[4]

8.9 When working in courtrooms, Auslan interpreters are required to abide by the Australian Sign Language Interpreters Association Code of Ethics (ASLIA).[5] All sign language interpreters are also bound by the Legal Interpreting Policy.[6] Both documents require accredited sign language interpreters to remain impartial during proceedings, not to contribute their opinions or ideas in any way and maintain strict confidentiality.[7]

8.10 There are currently 125 Certified Provisional Auslan Interpreters, 56 Certified Auslan Interpreters and one Certified Conference Auslan Interpreter in Victoria.[8] Only a small pool of these interpreters do legal work. Expression Australia is one of three Victorian-based Auslan providers. It has advised the Commission that of 70 interpreters working in the legal setting (court, tribunal, other legal) through its service, 20 interpreters do 75 per cent of the work with not all requests able to be filled.[9]

8.11 During 2018–2020, Expression Australia recorded 1071 bookings for Auslan interpreters to work in legal settings. This contrasts with 1500 bookings per month for overall bookings.[10]

8.12 Because interpreters work in courtrooms across Victoria, metropolitan interpreters will generally travel to regional Victoria to conduct regional court work.

8.13 Usually, the court places a booking on behalf of a party who is deaf involved in a legal proceeding. Indicative costs from one service provider for two court interpreters working in tandem for two hours is $440.00; a half day is $880.00; and a full day is $1760.00.[11] For multi-day court cases, additional interpreters may be required to keep interpreter consistency and ensure subject matter knowledge for the duration of the case.[12] Preparation and briefing time costs may be included for longer, more complex cases. Additional travel payments apply for non-metropolitan areas, and full costs are incurred if bookings are cancelled within 48 hours.[13]

8.14 The Victorian Government’s guidelines specify that all government departments and funded agencies are responsible for ensuring that an interpreter will be provided and that the service is provided at no cost to the client.[14]

8.15 Furthermore, the Victorian Disability Access Bench Book states that in criminal proceedings an accused is entitled without discrimination to have free assistance of an interpreter if they cannot understand or speak English.[15]

Logistics of arranging Auslan interpreters

8.16 The nature of the jury selection process raises logistical problems with the booking of Auslan interpreters for jury service. One of the issues is that the selection process is unpredictable. It is impossible to say with certainty that a juror needing supports will be selected for a particular trial. The selection process commences with random selection from the electoral roll. The panel is selected by random ballot and the prospective juror may ultimately be challenged off the jury very late in the selection process.

8.17 In this situation it might be necessary to have an Auslan interpreter assist a prospective juror through the empanelment process as well as being able to call on multiple interpreters to assist in a trial. The likely duration of a trial may be unknown until a person is balloted on a particular panel on the day. It is therefore very difficult to know how long an interpreter will be needed. The small number of available interpreters who work in legal settings in Victoria also make it difficult to call on interpreters for a trial at short notice.

8.18 The Commission is keen to hear community views about how these logistical issues could be managed and Auslan interpreters booked in advance.

Hearing loops

8.19 Hearing loops are used by Australian courts including the County Court and Supreme Court in Victoria, as well as in courts in the UK, Ireland, New Zealand and the United States. However not all Victorian courtrooms are equipped with hearing loops. The Disability Access Bench Book notes that where hearing loops are not in place, ‘judicial officers should consider whether a different courtroom is required’.[16]

8.20 Hearing loops enable people who wear hearing aids to hear more clearly by taking a sound source and transferring it directly into a hearing aid without background noise interference or distortion.[17]

8.21 Not all hearing aids will be compatible with all hearing loops. There are sometimes mismatches between the hearing aid and the hearing loop technology.

Communication Access Real Time Translation (CART)

8.22 Communication Access Real Time Translation (CART) is used by the Family Court of Australia and the Federal Court of Australia[18] as well as by courts in the UK and some states of the United States. CART is a system run by specialised CART writers, stenographers and court reporters to transcribe and translate spoken words and sounds into text, in real time, on a big screen, phone, laptop or mobile device. Software is utilised by operators to translate speech to text. CART can be combined with an audio component (such as hearing loops).[19]

8.23 In the jury context it would be necessary to arrange for stenographers and court reporters to assist a deaf juror in advance of the jury selection process and trial.

Special materials and formats of evidence

8.24 It may be necessary to provide supplementary written materials or transcripts to jurors who are deaf or hard of hearing.

Other technological supports: current and emerging

8.25 As Artificial Intelligence (AI) technology becomes more sophisticated, technologies designed to ‘translate’ speech into text, or speech into Auslan, and vice versa, are developing. These are not necessarily appropriate in their current form, but may indicate future directions for available supports.

Automated speech recognition

8.26 Certain apps can transcribe speech from multiple individuals onto a screen in close to real time by connecting to several devices with the app downloaded and microphones turned on. Automated speech recognition is used to assign text for each person in the group through colour coding.[20] These apps also add punctuation to speech.[21] Alternatively, designated speakers may talk into a Bluetooth microphone, from some distance away, and still picked up by the user’s smartphone or device.[22] Google Live Transcribe is a recently launched app of this kind. It is compatible with many devices and has sophisticated features including indicating the volume of speech as compared to background noise.[23]

Sign language translators

8.27 Sign language translators are emerging AI systems designed to ‘translate’ sign language to spoken English. These technologies generally utilise gloves to capture signs, and/or cameras and sensors to pick up on movement and facial expressions, then convert this to speech or written English.[24] For example, the Signall system is a European development that involves a deaf user signing towards the camera, which is translated through AI, while a hearing user speaks and their speech is picked up by voice recognition, and translated into text.[25] However, members of the deaf community have noted that similar apps do not ‘translate’ ASL, rather they ‘merely recognise hand signals and turn them into an English word per sign’.[26]

Lipreading devices

8.28 Many people who are deaf or hard of hearing use lipreading as a tool to understand speech. Lipreading devices use a camera to capture the lips of a speaker, via a headset worn by the speaker, so that an individual can gain a closer view.[27] AI is currently being developed to enable automated recognition of speech through machine learning of lip movements. In the future this could be developed into a device carried by a hearing impaired person to capture and translate speech via automated lip reading.[28]

People who are blind or have low vision

Special materials and format of evidence

8.29 It may be necessary to provide written materials in audio form, through tools discussed below. Documents may also be required in a larger font, in plain typeface with spacing between the words, or printed on a tinted paper.[29] Where a person wishes to use their own reading enhancement software, documents should be provided in Word format.[30] Where documents are not available in any accessible formats, a support person may be required to explain and assist the juror.[31]

Reading assistance software

8.30 Screen reading programs translate the written text displayed on a screen for a voice synthesiser which then reproduces the text as speech.[32] Popular screen readers include the Jaws Screen Reader, which speaks electronic or scanned material and can also create Braille output.[33] Another is Zoom Text which ‘enlarges and enhances everything on [a] computer screen, echoes your typing and essential program activity, and automatically reads documents, web pages, email.’[34]


8.31 Magnifiers are used to enlarge the size of images such as print or pictures. Magnifiers can be non-electronic or electronic.[35]

8.32 Electronic magnifiers come in many different varieties. Some have a camera system that displays a magnified image on a monitor. Others are hand-held and portable. Electronic magnifiers can also be mounted on eyeglasses.[36]

8.33 CCTV magnifiers have a camera that is on a frame, displaying a magnified image on a monitor. Text and images can be magnified and the contrast can be altered to brighten images. Sometimes CCTV magnifiers include speech output so that a person can hear the text being read as it is displayed on the monitor.[37]

Braille material

8.34 Braille material can be created through Braille embossers which print Braille output from a computer onto paper.[38] Braille embossers are accompanied by Braille translation software that can translate documents in word processing programs into Braille.[39]

8.35 Electronic or refreshable Braille displays are a tactile device that can be connected to computers or smart devices through bluetooth. They enable the user to read the contents of a screen through braille. Braille displays electronically raise and lower different combinations of pins in braille cells, and the display changes continuously as the user moves their cursor around on the screen.[40]

Assistance animals and mobility canes

8.36 Blind jurors may also rely on mobility tools to assist them to participate in the empanelment process at Court.

8.37 The physical accessibility of courts across Victoria are variable.[41] In Melbourne, the County Court building is relatively new and accessible. However, the Supreme Court building is less accessible and may require forward planning for those with mobility difficulties. County and Supreme Court registries and services aim to provide assistance to people with mobility needs, and can be contacted by telephone in advance.[42]

8.38 An assistance animal or mobility cane may assist a prospective juror to navigate and feel comfortable in a courtroom, jury room and within the court building.

8.39 The Disability Access Bench Book states that where assistance animals accompany court users with disability, there will be a need to allow water and toilet breaks.[43]

8.40 Under the Equal Opportunity Act in Victoria, it is against the law to discriminate against a person because they have an assistance dog.[44]

8.41 Mobility canes can ‘enable a person who is blind or has low vision to detect all obstacles and hazards within their path of travel’ and can aid balance and provide physical support.[45] White identification canes indicate to others that a person has low vision.[46]

Support person

8.42 A prospective juror who is blind or has low vision may also need the assistance of a support person to help them to serve.

8.43 A person with disability can be assisted and supported by a range of people in court proceedings in Victoria. Some of the types of support people mentioned in the Disability Access Bench Book include:

• emotional support person

• independent communication support worker

• communication assistant

• Court Network volunteer to offer support and non-legal information to people appearing in court.[47]

Audio describers

8.44 Audio Description offers people who are blind or have low vision an understanding of what is happening visually within different arts and entertainment mediums.[48] In Victoria, the key audio description organisation is Description Victoria. Audio describers work across theatre shows, exhibitions, documentary videos, films, fireworks displays and live art experiences in Victoria.[49]

8.45 In December 2019 the Australian Government announced funding to the ABC and SBS to introduce audio description services for television after 30 years of advocacy.[50] Vision Australia has offers audio description services across the arts and entertainment industry.[51]

8.46 Audio describers are not currently used in courtrooms in Australia. In the United States, audio describers work in courtrooms across the country. For example, the New Jersey Bench Manual on Jury Selection provides that audio describers can be used to support people who are blind. They serve a similar role to readers, note takers or transcribers, and any such person takes an oath or affirmation prior to assisting during the legal proceeding.[52]

Emerging technology

8.47 AI developments have resulted in more sophisticated descriptive applications for people who are blind or have low vision. ‘Seeing AI’ is a phone camera app that narrates the world around an individual in real time, describing people, text and objects.[53] Amongst other things, the app can speak text as it appears in front of the phone camera, including handwritten text, recognise friends (through facial recognition) and describe people in the vicinity, including their age, gender and perceived emotional status. It can recognise currency, describe colours and the scene around a person.[54] Users can tap their fingers on an image on a touch screen to hear a description of an object and spatial relationships around it.[55]


26 What technologies/supports would assist people who are deaf, hard of hearing, blind or with low vision to serve as jurors?

27 What role could a support person play in assisting people who are blind or who have low vision in the court room and in the jury room? Who is likely to perform this role?

28 How could Auslan interpreters, court reporters and stenographers be booked or arranged in advance to ensure that a prospective juror could be supported to serve?

(a) How might a system respond to the unpredictability of the selection process?

(b) How might a system respond to the small number of interpreters working in a legal setting?

29 How could supports be provided where courtrooms are not evenly accessible or equipped with aids?

Court familiarisation

8.48 The Disability Access Bench Book states that court users with disability should receive a tour of the court and facilities. In this regard ‘judicial officers can have a role in familiarising individuals at the commencement of and during hearings.’[56]

8.49 Early visits to the court, prior to jury empanelment, would allow jurors to make a self-assessment of the supports they may require, and inform court staff at a preliminary stage. This would also be an opportunity for a prospective juror to become familiar with the courtroom layout to avoid additional stress on the day. This process is routine in the United Kingdom, and the Commission is informed that it can also occur in the Australian Capital Territory.


30 Should there be an option for a person who is deaf, hard of hearing, blind or with low vision to be able to visit court before empanelment to familiarise themselves with the court and explore with court officials what particular supports they might need to serve?

Guidelines for new laws

8.50 The experiences of people who are blind or deaf in the jury system in the United States suggests that the information and assistance provided by the first point of contact with jury or court officials can have a significant impact on that person’s participation, regardless of their rights at law.

8.51 The National Federation of the Blind (NFB) has critiqued ongoing ‘de facto’ exclusion of many people who are blind from juries in the United States. It has reported that blind jurors may be turned away by court officials who presume that they will not be selected.[57] These instances occur despite disability legislation and cases confirming the rights of blind jurors to serve on juries, and even the recognition of the ability of blind trial judges to preside over cases with visual evidence.[58]

8.52 In the ACT, courts and tribunals have developed policy guidelines to accompany its reforms[59] setting out the procedures that all staff in the Sheriff’s office will follow if a member of the jury pool identifies as requiring reasonable supports.[60]


31 Should guidelines about the operation of new laws be developed by the court and Juries Victoria to accompany reforms to ensure that they operate effectively?

Court room layout

8.53 Adjustments may need to be made to the layout of the courtroom and the jury room.

8.54 During the mock trial study in New South Wales it was suggested that interpreters be positioned at the bar table, which would ‘enable the deaf juror to successfully view the interpreters, advocates, witnesses and the accused in the one field of sight’.[61]

8.55 The lighting in the courtroom may need to be adjusted for people with low vision or to assist with lip-reading.[62] Sometimes it may be necessary to move positions as the light changes,[63] or for a juror to be seated near the witness stand.[64] This accommodation may necessitate listings within appropriately configured courtrooms, which is a further logistical consideration.


32 How should court and jury rooms be organised to accommodate a person who is deaf, hard of hearing, blind or with low vision, using supports to serve?

Trial adjustments

8.56 The Commission is keen to obtain community feedback on what other trial adjustments might be needed to accommodate jurors who are deaf, hard of hearing, blind or have low vision. For example:

• meal and rest breaks

• instructions from the judge about how the trial will run with supports

• the provision of some instructions in written form or in other accessible formats.[65]

8.57 The Disability Access Bench Book encourages judicial officers to ‘ask the person what will work for them and continue checking in with them to ensure they can understand.’[66] The additional time required for these adjustments may be factored into considerations around the reasonableness of supports in light of the anticipated length of the trial.

8.58 Jury directions are instructions provided by the judge to the jury. Another adjustment that can be made is to provide the jury with ‘integrated directions’.

8.59 Integrated directions are also known as ‘question trails.’[67] The Criminal Charge Book outlines that judges may ‘give directions in the form of factual questions that address the matters the jury must consider or be satisfied of in order to reach a verdict.’[68] Integrated directions are usually a factual question combined with another issue, such as directions on the evidence and how the evidence is to be assessed, or counsels’ statements about how the parties have put their case in relation to the issues.[69]

8.60 The purpose of an integrated direction is to assist the jury to understand the issues of law and the legal consequences that can arise from interpreting evidence. Integrated jury directions in written form may be of practical benefit to jurors from the subject groups. Research suggests that integrated jury direction approaches are more effective for juror comprehension generally. [70]

8.61 A judge may also give the jury more general information in the form of a written ‘jury guide’ which contains integrated directions, evidentiary directions and/or evidence considered pertinent to the trial.[71] This is a judge’s summary to assist the jury to understand the relevant matters of law, consider questions that may be pertinent to the trial, or describe the possible verdicts at which they may properly arrive.[72]

8.62 A further issue for consideration is whether the use of supports may need to be incorporated into the record of the trial. The Commission is interested in hearing views about what might be done to ensure that an appellate court has an accurate record of the trial in situations where the juror uses a different method of comprehension or is supported to serve. This is unlikely to be an issue where a supporter provides an oath to the court that they will ‘well and truly interpret the proceedings and jury deliberations’.


33 What trial adjustments might be needed to accommodate a juror using supports to serve?

34 What is the best way of informing the court and parties about the use of supports in the trial process? When should this occur?

35 How should jurors be informed about how a fellow juror’s supports will work?

36 Does the use of supports raise any questions about the accuracy of a trial record for appellate court consideration?


8.63 Reforming the law to make juries more inclusive, and instituting processes to accommodate people with disability, will inevitably involve costs. Both the Juries Commissioner and the courts will require funding to implement reforms to practices and procedures.

8.64 However, because of the small number of trials likely to be involved and the fact that large-scale changes are not recommended, it is unlikely to impact court resourcing significantly.

8.65 Victorian courts are already equipped to address the needs of witnesses, parties and lawyers with disability. Many costs related to the extension of these supports to jurors would supplement existing efforts while also serving to make the courts more accessible for the public at large.

8.66 It is recognised that costs may not be evenly distributed amongst courts and regions, as some courts are presently less well equipped or resourced to accommodate people who have a disability.

8.67 Supporting blind and deaf jurors to serve may impact trial duration which could have cost implications.


37 What are the likely cost implications associated with reforming the law?

38 Do the cost considerations differ in regional areas?

39 How could supports be provided in the most cost-effective way?

  1. Judicial College of Victoria, Disability Access Bench Book (2016) [1.2].

  2. National Disability Practitioners, AUSLAN: What You Need to Know (NDP Factsheet, August 2015) <>.

  3. ‘Diploma of Auslan PSP51018’, Melbourne Polytechnic (Web Page) <>; ‘Diploma of Interpreting (LOTE-English) PSP50916’, RMIT University (Web Page, 2020) <>.

  4. ‘Auslan Pathways’, NAATI (Web Page) <>.

  5. ASLIA, Code of Ethics and Guidelines for Professional Conduct (Report, 2007) <>.

  6. ASLIA, Legal Interpreting Policy (Report, 2019) <>.

  7. Ibid 2 [3].

  8. Information provided from NAATI to Victorian Law Reform Commission, 28 September 2020.

  9. Information provided from Expression Australia to Victorian Law Reform Commission, 28 September 2020.

  10. Ibid.

  11. Information provided from Expression Australia to Victorian Law Reform Commission, 20 October 2020.

  12. Ibid.

  13. Ibid.

  14. Department of Premier and Cabinet (Vic), Using Interpreting Services—Victorian Government Guidelines on Policy and Procedures (Report, August 2019) 19 <>.

  15. Judicial College of Victoria, Disability Access Bench Book (2016) ch 5.9; Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006 (Vic) s 25(2)(i).

  16. Judicial College of Victoria, Disability Access Bench Book (2016) [4.4].

  17. ‘All About Induction Loops’, Ampetronic (Web Page) <>.

  18. ‘Service Charter for the Family Court of Australia and the Federal Court of Australia’, Family Court (Web Page) <>.

  19. ‘Captioning and CART’, Hearing Loss Association of America (Web Page) <>.

  20. Larry Medwetzky, ‘Mobile Device Apps for People with Hearing Loss’ (2015) (September/October) Hearing Loss Magazine 26, 27.

  21. ‘Best Live Captions for All Conversations’, AVA (Web Page, 2020) <>.

  22. Larry Medwetzky, ‘Mobile Device Apps for People with Hearing Loss’ (2015) (September/October) Hearing Loss Magazine 26, 27.

  23. Sagar Savla, ‘Real-Time Continuous Transcription with Live Transcribe’, Google AI Blog (Web Page) <>.

  24. ‘First System to Automatically Translate Sign Language’, European Commission Cordis (Web Page) <>.

  25. ‘Home’, SignAll (Web Page) <>.

  26. Emily Matchar, ‘Sign Language Translating Devices Are Cool. But Are They Useful?’, Smithsonian Magazine (online, (26 February 2019) <>.

  27. ‘Audisee’, AbleData (Web Page) </product/audisee>.

  28. Matthew Hutson, ‘Lip-Reading Artificial Intelligence Could Help the Deaf—or Spies’, Science AAAS (Web Page, 31 July 2018)


  29. Equal Treatment Bench Book (Judicial College UK, 2018) 346.

  30. Ibid.

  31. Judicial College of Victoria, Disability Access Bench Book (2016) [7.4].

  32. ‘Computer Screen Readers’, Vision Australia (Web Page) <>.

  33. ‘JAWS’, Freedom Scientific (Web Page) <>.

  34. ‘ZoomText Magnifier/Reader’, ZoomText (Web Page) <>.

  35. ‘Magnifiers’, Vision Australia (Web Page) <>.

  36. ‘Guide to Buying Low Vision Magnifiers’, All About Vision (Web Page) <>.

  37. Brian Gerritsen, ‘Electronic Magnifiers and Magnifying Systems’, VisionAware (Web Page) <>.

  38. ‘Braille’, Vision Australia (Web Page) <>.

  39. Ibid.

  40. ‘Library Guide: Blind/Visual Impairment: Common Assistive Technologies’, Illinois Library (Web Page) <>.

  41. Information provided from Juries Commissioner to Victorian Law Reform Commission, 6 October 2020.

  42. I Need Help County Court of Victoria (Web Page) <>; Supreme Court of Victoria, Support Services (Web Page) <>.

  43. Judicial College of Victoria, Disability Access Bench Book (2016) [4.4].

  44. Equal Opportunity Act 2010 (Vic) s 7. See also Domestic Animals Act 1994 (Vic) s 7(4).

  45. ‘Accessible Equipment’, Vision Australia (Web Page) <>.

  46. Ibid.

  47. Judicial College of Victoria, Disability Access Bench Book (2016) [5.6.1]–[5.6.2], [5.6.8].

  48. Vision Australia, ‘Audio Description Services’, What Is Audio Description (Web Page) <>.

  49. Description Victoria Inc, Description Victoria (Web Page) <>.

  50. Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Communications, Australian Government, Accessible Television (Web Page, 2019) <>.

  51. Vision Australia, ‘Audio Description Services’, What Is Audio Description (Web Page) <>.

  52. New Jersey Courts, New Jersey Judiciary Bench Manual on Jury Selection (Manual, 4 December 2014) 32.

  53. ‘Evolutionary Technology for the Blind’, The Blind Guide (Web Page) <>.

  54. ‘Seeing AI App from Microsoft’, Microsoft (Web Page) <>.

  55. Devin Coldewey, ‘Blind Users Can Now Explore Photos by Touch with Microsoft’s Seeing AI’, TechCrunch (Web Page, 12 March 2019) <>.

  56. Judicial College of Victoria, Disability Access Bench Book (2016) [4.4].

  57. National Federation of the Blind, ‘The Right of Blind People to Serve on Juries Comes to the Court’, Braille Monitor (online, October 2019) <>.

  58. National Federation of the Blind, ‘The Right of Blind People to Serve on Juries Comes to the Court’, Braille Monitor (online, October 2019) <>, citing People v Hayes, 923 P 2d 221 (Colo App, 1995); Galloway v Superior Court of the District of Columbia, 816 F Supp 12 (DDC, 1993), 17.

  59. ACT Courts and Tribunal, Reasonable Support for Jurors Policy and Procedure (Report, June 2018).

  60. Ibid 2.

  61. Sandra Hale et al, Participation in the Administration of Justice: Deaf Citizens as Jurors (Australian Research Council Linkage Project No 120200261, 2016) [4.2.4].

  62. Judicial College of Victoria, Disability Access Bench Book (2016) [5.5.2].

  63. Equal Treatment Bench Book (Judicial College UK, 2018).

  64. New Zealand Ministry of Justice, ‘Disability Support’, Jury Service (Web Page, 28 January 2020) <>.

  65. Judicial College of Victoria, Disability Access Bench Book (2016) [4.4]; Equal Treatment Bench Book (Judicial College UK, 2018) 346.

  66. Judicial College of Victoria, Disability Access Bench Book (2016) [4.4].

  67. Quail v R [2014] VSCA 336.

  68. ‘Criminal Charge Book’, Judicial College of Victoria (Online Manual, 2017) [3.9]; Jury Directions Act 2015 (Vic) s 67(3).

  69. McKinn v The Queen [2019] VSCA 114, [78]; Jury Directions Act 2015 (Vic) [67].

  70. Benjamin Spivak, James RP Ogloff and Jonathan Clough, ‘Asking the Right Questions: Examining the Efficacy of Question Trails as a Method of Improving Lay Comprehension and Application of Legal Concepts’ (2019) 26(3) Psychiatry, Psychology & Law 441.

  71. ‘Criminal Charge Book’, Judicial College of Victoria (Online Manual, 2017) [3.9].

  72. Criminal Procedure Act 2009 (Vic) s 223.

Voiced by Amazon Polly