Child Murder Accused Couple to Face Trial Without Jury In a rare and controversial decision, a judge in New South Wales, Australia, has ruled that a couple accused of murdering their infant daughter will face trial without a jury. The decision came after the couple’s defense team argued that extensive media coverage of the case had created such a level of prejudice that it would be impossible to find an impartial jury. The prosecution agreed with the defense’s assessment, stating that “the pretrial publicity has been both intense and inflammatory.” The case has garnered significant public attention since the couple was arrested in 2021. According to the prosecution, the 8-month-old girl died from blunt force trauma to the head. The accused parents have pleaded not guilty, claiming that the child’s injuries were accidental. Judge Mark Sutherland, in his ruling, acknowledged that trials without juries are “not the norm” but emphasized that the circumstances of this case warranted such an exception. He cited the “unprecedented level of publicity” and the “deeply distressing nature of the allegations” as reasons for his decision. The judge explained that a jury trial would be “likely to result in a miscarriage of justice” due to the potential bias against the accused. He expressed confidence that a bench trial, in which a judge alone will hear the evidence and make a verdict, would ensure a fair and impartial outcome. The decision has sparked mixed reactions. Some legal experts have praised Judge Sutherland for his sensitivity to the unique circumstances of the case. Others have expressed concerns that the lack of a jury could undermine public confidence in the justice system. The trial is scheduled to begin in May 2023. The accused couple, who have been granted bail, face a maximum sentence of life imprisonment if found guilty.Murder Trial to Proceed Without JuryMurder Trial to Proceed Without Jury In a case involving the murder of a three-year-old girl, a woman and her fiancé will face trial without a jury due to concerns of prejudicial testimony. The Case Kaydence Mills’s body was discovered at the Chinchilla Weir in 2020. Her mother, Sinitta Dawita, and fiancé, Tane Desatge, were charged with murder, interfering with a corpse, and torture. Judge-Only Trial Desatge had requested a judge-only trial to prevent prejudice from testimony that could only be used against one defendant. However, Justice Martin Burns rejected the application. Reasons for Jury Exclusion Justice Burns cited the risk of jury members becoming inflamed or distracted by highly emotive allegations. He noted that the cumulative effects of the evidence could impair their ability to assess the case impartially. News Article Concerns Justice Burns expressed concern that a news story about the case, published in the Toowoomba Chronicle, could have been read by potential jurors. He feared that the article may have biased their perspectives. Trial Details Dawita and Desatge will face a joint trial scheduled to begin on July 22nd. The trial is expected to last three weeks.A couple accused of murdering a child will face trial without a jury after the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) applied to have the case heard by a judge alone. The decision was made after the CPS argued that the case was too complex and sensitive to be heard by a jury. The trial is expected to begin at the Old Bailey in London on 11 January. The couple, who cannot be named for legal reasons, are charged with murder, manslaughter, and child cruelty. They have pleaded not guilty to all charges. The victim, a young child, was found dead at a property in south London in 2021. The cause of death has not been released. The trial is expected to last for several weeks and will hear evidence from a number of witnesses, including experts in forensic science and child protection. The judge alone trial process is used in a small number of cases in England and Wales where it is considered that a jury trial would be inappropriate. In such cases, the judge hears all the evidence and makes a decision on the verdict. The decision to have the case heard by a judge alone has been met with criticism from some quarters, who argue that it undermines the principle of trial by jury. However, the CPS has defended its decision, arguing that it is in the best interests of justice.