Freeburn v The Queen (No 2)

The appellant, Freeburn, appealed against his conviction and sentence for the murder of Elizabeth Wilms. The appeal was heard by the High Court of Australia. The primary issue before the court was whether the appellant's conviction for murder should be substituted with a conviction for manslaughter, and if so, what the appropriate sentence should be given the circumstances of the case. The court was also required to consider the appellant's background, his post-offence conduct, and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on his potential for rehabilitation.

The court found that the principles in Bugmy v The Queen were applicable, and that the appellant's conviction for murder should indeed be substituted with a conviction for manslaughter. The court considered the appellant's dysfunctional upbringing, his prior history of violent offending, and his post-offence conduct, which included failing to seek help for the victim and attempting to conceal the crime. The court also took into account the vulnerability of the victim due to her mild intellectual disability and drug use, as well as the seriousness of the offence in the context of their short but abusive relationship. The court held that the appellant's moral culpability was high, but that there were mitigating factors which should be taken into account when determining the appropriate sentence.

In light of the above, the court sentenced the appellant to twelve years' imprisonment for the manslaughter of Elizabeth Wilms, with a non-parole period of nine years. The court held that the appellant should be held in a management or protection unit, and that the impact of COVID-19 restrictions should be taken into account in determining his prospects for rehabilitation. The court noted that the appellant had made two offers to plead guilty to manslaughter, and that he had guarded prospects of rehabilitation due to his background and the nature of the offence. The court emphasised the importance of considering the principles in Bugmy v The Queen when sentencing Indigenous offenders, and noted that the appellant's sentence should reflect the seriousness of the offence, while also taking into account any mitigating factors.