A court orders a retrial for a man accused of the murder of Cameron Reilly after quashing his conviction. According to reports, the decision follows a finding that the trial judge’s directions to the jury during the original trial lacked balance. The court also finds that parts of the charge may have been perceived as support or “advocacy” for the prosecution case, rather than maintaining judicial neutrality. In addition, the ruling states that some elements of the judge’s charge may have been “disparaging” toward the defence case. As a result, the conviction is set aside and the case returns for a new trial rather than being concluded at the appellate stage. The outlets describe the same core basis for the order: the jury charge is treated as not sufficiently even-handed, with the implication that this could have influenced how jurors evaluated the competing arguments. The retrial proceeds under the court’s directions, with the underlying murder allegation remaining to be determined by a new jury.