An unsuccessful appeal by NSW childcare fraudster Melissa Higgins has offered an extraordinary window into the off-limits territory of jury deliberations.
A sensational court judgment highlighted the dysfunction among jurors during her trial.
Higgins was jailed in 2016 for a $3 million Government benefits scam.
She was jailed for a maximum of seven years for falsely claiming Commonwealth benefits intended for vulnerable children and using forged documents.
During the trial, one juror voiced daily reminders about a trip she had planned and wanted a decision "as quickly as possible", a Sheriff's officer was told when they called the panel back for interviews in July last year.
"I've already missed my holiday in Darwin to see my son," the woman complained, according to a peer.
"This is ridiculous, can this go on for any longer?"
Anonymised interview transcripts reveal many grew "very antsy" as deliberations dragged on, including one "hostile and reluctant" woman who at one stage "refused to participate" and walked out.
There were tears, "bullying" and more than one juror conceded the decision was not unanimous, with some panel members just wanting freedom.
The Sheriff's officer was told one juror was "only there for the money and didn't care" and another, an artist, would "draw rather than pay attention".
The panel's foreman was replaced after an inappropriate, sexually-charged joke about his youth and one of the male jurors requested frequent toilet breaks so he could check his phone.
But other panel members said while there was "tension" and "heated discussion", they regarded this as normal discussion.
The interviews were conducted after one of the jurors called the judge's associate the day after the verdict, concerned proper deliberation process was ignored.
The appeal judges said the "retrospective exposure" of what happens in a jury room was "unusual".
Higgins claimed she'd been deprived of a fair trial due to actual bias by jurors — to both her and their peers.
Of particular issue was a juror comment to "lock her up and throw the key away", as well as whether jokes about a "bogan" who was "from the country" pulling off the scam could be considered racist or derogatory.
The judges ruled the word "bogan" carried no racial connotation, also noting there were "a number of inconsistencies" in the jurors' statements.
The NSW Court of Criminal Appeal rejected Higgins's bid to overturn her conviction.
Law Council of Australia President Pauline Wright said jurors played a vital role in a democracy.
"The nature of the jury being drawn from ordinary people in the community, randomly selected, ensures there's a perception of fairness, objectivity and arm's length deliberation," she said.
Ms Wright said there was no doubt jury room discussions could be "robust" and the secrecy was important.
"That ordinary confidentiality of the jury's deliberative process is part of the ability for the jury to explore their thoughts, their private experiences and the perceptions they bring to the evidence that's before them," she said.
"If they had to explain their reasons, it would undermine the whole notion that it should be a collective decision, ultimately and ideally by unanimous agreement, among the jurors."
