The common law test of voluntariness has come to be associated with important policy rationales including the privilege against self-incrimination. However, when the test originated more than a century ago, it was a test concerned specifically with the truthfulness of confession evidence; which evidence was at that time adduced in the form of indirect oral testimony, that is, as hearsay. Given that, a century later, confession evidence is now mostly adduced in the form of an audiovisual recording that can be observed directly by the trial judge, rather than as indirect oral testimony, there may be capacity for a different emphasis regarding the question of admissibility. This article considers the law currently operating in Western Australia, Queensland and South Australia to see whether or not, in the form of an audiovisual recording, the exercise of judicial discretion as to the question of the admissibility of confession evidence might be supported if the common law test of voluntariness was not a strict test of exclusion.

普通法对自愿性的检验已经与重要的政策依据相关联，其中包括反对自我追究权的特权。但是，当这个测试起源于一个多世纪以前时，它是一个专门与认罪证据的真实性有关的测试。当时以间接口头证词的形式（即传闻）援引了哪些证据。鉴于一个世纪后，认罪证据现在大多以视听记录的形式提供，可由初审法官直接观察，而不是作为间接口头证词，对于可否受理问题可能有不同的强调能力。本文考虑了目前在西澳大利亚州，昆士兰州和南澳大利亚州实施的法律，以视听记录的形式查看是否