Joseph Peter Wright v The Queen

[2021] NSWDC 754

District Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation:

Joseph Peter Wright v R [2021] NSWDC 754

Hearing dates:

23 September 2021 - 24 September 2021

Date of orders:

24 September 2021

Decision date:

24 September 2021

Jurisdiction:

Criminal

Before:

Neilson DCJ

Decision:

See para [46] below

Catchwords:

CRIME – APPEAL

CONVICTION APPEAL against domestic violence offences and possession of ammunition offences.

SEVERITY APPEAL against possession of cannabis, possession of a cross bow and possession of handcuffs.

FACT FINDING – Need to contrast and compare case of each party. Local Court analysed defence case more closely than police case, when onus of proof required the opposite approach. Implausibilities in police case rather than in defence case: Defence case was a reasonable possibility as to what occurred on domestic violence charges. Proudman v Dayman defence available on ammunition possession charge. Some penalties too severe.

Legislation Cited:

Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999

Cases Cited:

Proudman v Dayman (1941) HCA 28

R v Beryl [1982] QR 508

Texts Cited:

Nil

Category:

Principal judgment

Parties:

Appellant – Joseph Peter Wright
R – Crown

Representation:

Appellant
McGiff, P.
Crown
Laird, D.

File Number(s):

2019/00402160

Publication restriction:

Nil

Judgment

1. HIS HONOUR: This is an appeal against certain convictions recorded by Magistrate Donnelly sitting in the Local Court at Muswellbrook on 18 December 2020. The proceedings were actually heard by his Honour at Singleton on 16 October 2020, but his Honour gave judgment at Muswellbrook on 18 December 2020. The Court Attendance Notices were initially listed for hearing at Wyong Local Court, but I understand the case was administered from both Muswellbrook and Singleton Local Courts.

2. The appellant was charged with common assault, intimidation and assault occasioning actual bodily harm on his then wife Laani Maree Wright on 20 December 2019. Those three convictions are part of the appeal against conviction. The other offence for which there is an appeal against conviction is a charge of possession of ammunition for a firearm without holding a licence or permit to do so. To that offence the appellant pleaded not guilty on the basis that he had made an honest and reasonable mistake of fact. The three other offences, which might conveniently be described as domestic violence offences, were defended on the basis that they were not committed by the appellant as charged, but rather insofar as there was physical interaction between himself and his wife, that it was in self-defence.

Background

3. Some background is called for. In the Local Court the learned magistrate referred to the appellant as the defendant and his wife as the complainant. After directing himself in law, his Honour then purported to set out certain facts leading up to the events which were the subject of the charges. He commenced that section of his judgment with these words:

“The defendant and the complainant at the time of the incident had been in a relationship for nearly ten years. They have been married for six years. They have three children together.”

The family group at the…