CATCHWORDS:
CRIMINAL LAW – application for leave to appeal against sentence – murder – life sentence –principles relevant to imposing natural life sentences – whether the offence was in the worst class of case – premeditation – whether mutilation of deceased’s body following murder was relevant to objective seriousness of offence – degree of violence – degree of danger to the community – risk of re-offending – no real prospects of rehabilitation – personality disorder – psychiatric evidence of personality – mental stability – likely future personality – no discount given for guilty plea –- no prior convictions – whether sentence manifestly excessive – protection of the community

LEGISLATION CITED:
Crimes Act 1900
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999
Crimes (Administration of Sentencing) Act 1999

DECISION:
Appeal dismissed

JUDGMENT:

IN THE COURT OF
CRIMINAL APPEAL

2001/2995
McCLELLAN CJ at CL
ADAMS J
LATHAM J
MONDAY 11 SEPTEMBER 2006

KNIGHT, Katherine Mary v REGINA

Judgment

McCLELLAN CJ at CL: The applicant pleaded guilty to the murder of her de facto husband, John Price, on 29 February 2000. She was sentenced to life imprisonment which by reason of s 19A of the Crimes Act 1900 means she must serve the sentence for the term of her natural life. She seeks leave to appeal against that sentence.
The sentencing judge heard evidence and submissions over a number of days. The applicant did not give evidence although her ERISP was tendered. Statements of evidence from the deceased’s family, the applicant’s previous partners and other persons were tendered. From the evidence the sentencing judge made findings with respect to the nature of the relationship between the applicant and the deceased and the events which preceded the killing. His Honour also received psychiatric evidence as to the personality of the applicant, her mental stability and likely future personality.
The facts relating to the murder
The circumstances of the killing of the deceased and the mutilation of his body by the applicant were described by the sentencing judge in the following terms:
“Mr Price was killed late on the night of 29 February 2000 or during the very early hours of the morning of 1 March 2000. His death was as a result of multiple injuries to various organs of his body, secondary to multiple stab wounds.
The post mortem examination revealed that Mr Price had been stabbed at least 37 times in various parts of both the front and back of his body. There may have been more wounds inflicted, but the extent of those found and…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Knight v R

Details

AGLC: Knight v R [2006] NSWCCA 292
Case: [2006] NSWCCA 292
Decision Date: 11 September 2006

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In Knight v R, the applicant, Knight, appealed against her sentence of life imprisonment imposed for the murder of her partner, Mr Price. The Court of Appeal considered the appeal against the sentence and the principles relevant to imposing a natural life sentence. The Court considered whether the offence was in the worst class of case, the degree of premeditation, violence, and danger to the community, and the risk of reoffending. The Court also considered the psychiatric evidence of Knight's personality disorder, mental stability, and likely future personality. The Court concluded that the culpability of the applicant was so grave as to require a life sentence, quite apart from any considerations of dangerousness. The Court dismissed the appeal against sentence.

The Court of Appeal considered the legal issues of whether the offence was in the worst class of case, the relevance of the premeditation and mutilation of the deceased's body to the objective seriousness of the offence, the degree of violence, the degree of danger to the community, the risk of re-offending, and the prospects of rehabilitation. The Court also considered whether the sentence was manifestly excessive and whether it provided adequate protection to the community. The Court concluded that the sentencing judge had considered all relevant factors and that there was no error in the judgment. The Court also noted that no discount was given for the guilty plea as there were no prior convictions, and the offence was of the utmost gravity. The Court dismissed the appeal against sentence.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

Background

Background to the litigation

The sentencing judge heard evidence and submissions over a number of days. The applicant did not give evidence although her ERISP was tendered. Statements of evidence from the deceased’s family, the applicant’s previous partners and other persons were tendered. From the evidence the sentencing judge made findings with respect to the nature of the relationship between the applicant and the deceased and the events which preceded the killing. His Honour also received psychiatric evidence as to the personality of the applicant, her mental stability and likely future personality.The facts relating to the murder The circumstances of the killing of the deceased and the mutilation of his body by the applicant were described by the sentencing judge in the following terms:“Mr Price was killed late on the night of 29 February 2000 or during the very early hours of the morning of 1 March 2000. His death was as a result of multiple injuries to various organs of his body, secondary to multiple stab wounds.The post mortem examination revealed that Mr Price had been stabbed at least 37 times in various parts of both the front and back of his body. There may have been more wounds inflicted, but the extent of those found and the subsequent acts of the prisoner in relation to Mr Price’s body rendered it impossible to know how many more there may have been and in particular the number of wounds which may have been inflicted in the area of his neck.Many of the wounds were deep, and extended into vital organs. These included the aorta, both lungs, the liver, the stomach, the descending colon, the pancreas, and the left kidney, the lower pole of which had virtually been sliced off.The wounds inflicted on Mr Price and the injuries which they caused resulted in the loss of a great deal of blood. This was found splattered and smeared throughout various parts of the house and in a pool, which was quite deep, and measured 1 metre x 2 metres. This pool was in the hallway of Mr Price’s home. At the time the police arrived on the morning of 1 March 2000 the blood in it was not fully congealed and had dried only at the edges. The blows which inflicted the injuries to Mr Price were in a pattern that spread from the upper part of his body to his buttocks and below and had been struck with some considerable force by a knife which had a long blade. A butcher’s knife which answered such a description was found adjacent to Mr Price’s body. In addition, a butcher’s steel for sharpening knives was found on a lounge chair next to his body. A sharpening stone was also found. It was open on a bench in the kitchen, quite close to the sink and stove. It had clearly been used.An examination of the blood stains, their differing characteristics and pattern of occurrence in various parts of the house, establish that Mr Price was first attacked by the prisoner in the principal bedroom of the premises at a time when he was in a recumbent posture. The wounds then inflicted were to the front of his body and it is clear that thereafter he got off the bed after, or as, some further injuries were being inflicted on him in the course of his attempts to escape from his assailant, the prisoner. He escaped from the bedroom and moved down the hall in order to get outside the premises but was pursued by the prisoner, who stabbed him in the back a number of times. Whilst in the hallway he tried to switch on the light. At that time he was heavily blood stained both front and back and appears to have then had further stab wounds inflicted to the front part of his body. In the course of his endeavour to escape Mr Price reached the front door and opened it and, as is apparent from the blood stains on the outside knob of the front door, he succeeded in getting outside the house. However, he did not remain outside and was either dragged or, as is much less likely, came back into the house and fell in the hallway quite close to the open doorway that leads into the lounge room in which his body was later found by police.That he lay in the hallway for some time is manifest by the considerable volume of blood found in the pool in the hallway. After he had been dead for some time his body was dragged by the prisoner from the hallway into the lounge room. That he had been dead for some time before this occurred is demonstrated most graphically by the photographs which show the smearing of blood caused by the moving of his body, especially by the thighs, buttocks and thoracic area of his back which were in contact with the floor. Those photographs and the evidence relating to them and the events surrounding the death establish without doubt that at the time Mr Price’s body was moved the blood in the pool was not fully fluid and thus did not flow in to fill the gaps caused by the movement of the body.I am satisfied that at the time the prisoner dragged Mr Price’s body from the hallway into the lounge room it was, subject to the wounds which had been inflicted and to which I have already referred, still entire. Thereafter the prisoner, who had for many years worked as a meat slicer in abattoirs, skinned Mr Price’s body. This was carried out with considerable expertise and an obviously steady hand so that his skin, including that of the head, face, nose, ears, neck, torso, genital organs and legs, was removed so as to form one pelt. So expertly was it done that, after the post mortem examination, the skin was able to be re-sown onto Mr Price’s body in a way which indicated a clear and appropriate, albeit grizzly, methodology. One small segment was left in place – the skin on the left upper chest.At some time after Mr Price had been skinned the prisoner hung his pelt on a meat hook on the architrave of the door of the lounge room, where it remained until it was later removed by investigating police.As is apparent from the fact that his head and neck were removed as part of one entire skin, Mr Price’s head was in place at the time he was skinned. However at some time between the time when the body was moved into the lounge room and skinned and about a time before 7.30 a.m. on 1 March 2000 the prisoner decapitated Mr Price’s body and at some stage arranged it with the left arm draped over an empty soft drink bottle, and the legs crossed. This was said in evidence to be an act of defilement demonstrating contempt for Mr Price’s remains. The evidence of the Medical Examiner establishes that the decapitation was effected at the C3/C4 junction and was done with a very sharp knife. The removal was clean and left an incised type wound. To remove Mr Price’s head in such a way required skill, which was consistent with the skills acquired by the prisoner in the course of her work as a meat slicer. It also required a steady hand at the relevant time.Not only was Mr Price’s head removed but parts of his buttocks were also sliced off. The excised parts of Mr Price were then taken by the prisoner to the kitchen and at some stage, after she had peeled and prepared various vegetables, she cooked Mr Price’s head in a large pot together with a number of the vegetables she had prepared so as to produce a sickening stew. The contents of the pot were still warm, estimated to be at between 40 and 50 degrees centigrade, when examined by police during the mid-morning of 1 March 2000. This supports the conclusion that the cooking of Mr Price’s head took place at a time into the early morning of 1 March 2000.The pieces which had been cut from Mr Price’s buttocks were baked in the oven of the premises by the prisoner together with other of the vegetables she had peeled. The gruesome steaks were then arranged on plates together with the vegetables which she had baked and left as meals for the son and daughter of the deceased, accompanied by vindictive notes to each in the handwriting of the prisoner. A third piece was thrown on the back lawn, whether for consumption by dogs or for some other purpose is not revealed in the evidence.”

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

The applicant claimed to have no recollection of the relevant events when she was interviewed. His Honour did not accept that claim, his analysis being as follows:“The prisoner claimed in her record of interview to have no recollection whatsoever of the events of and surrounding the death of Mr Price. The extent of her amnesia as claimed in her record of interview was virtually total, extending back into part of the day of 29 February, 2000 and into 1 March, 2000. However, as set out in paragraph 25 above she was able to remember and detail quite vividly events which appear to have immediately preceded Mr Price’s death. Furthermore, on the morning after her admission to hospital she was able to give details of the medication she had taken and its quantity. Although this was before she was questioned by the police, she still claimed in the course of that questioning that she had no recollection of such events. Piecing these various strands of evidence together it results in a picture in which her recollection ceases immediately before Mr Price’s death and recommences after the skinning, dismemberment and partial cooking of Mr Price had taken place. This is not a credible pattern for a true amnesia, according to the psychiatric evidence which I accept. Moreover, during the time of which she claims to have no recollection, she performed a number of tasks that required a steady hand, the application of skill and an understanding of driving a motor vehicle and of operating an automatic teller machine. She also showered, changed her clothes and walked from her house back to Mr Price’s house.I do not believe the prisoner’s statements as to her claimed amnesia. For reasons set out above and are further dealt with in the course of examining the medical evidence, I am satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that she has much more recollection than she has claimed and that her claimed extent of amnesia is convenient for her, both emotionally and litigiously. Although this issue was debated at some length both during the course of the hearing and in addresses, in one sense whether she had and has amnesia for the events is of little or no account in relation to the question of the penalty to be imposed upon the prisoner. Whether she remembers the events or not they are as horrendous. Whether she remembers the events or not, they were premeditated. Even if she has no recollection of the actual killing, dismemberment and partial cooking of Mr Price, that may be regarded as no more than a blocking out by her of events that are so horrendous as to cause revulsion and rejection by her as the person responsible for such acts. “The psychiatric evidence The sentencing judge had the benefit of evidence from the psychiatrists, Dr Delaforce, Dr Milton and Dr Lambeth. His Honour expressed the following conclusion in relation to the psychiatric material:“From the foregoing it can be seen that two of the psychiatrists called in the case (i.e. other than Dr Milton) were of the view that the prisoner had a borderline personality disorder, that the prospects of ridding her of such disorder were in essence nil, that she was and would remain a person dangerous to others if set at large in the community and that she continued to be capable of inflicting quite serious physical harm, even death, on members of the community, particularly on any one who crossed her. These included the family of Mr Price.In a practical sense the nuances of difference between the doctors do not matter. I am satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the end point of their evidence is that she is and will continue to be a very dangerous person and so continue indefinitely. Furthermore, her history of serious violence, particularly involving knives and extending over a long period, strongly supports the conclusion that were she to be released into the community at any time she would be likely to inflict serious injury, perhaps death and even mutilation, on those who cross her.”Was this a worst case?

Decision

Reasons for decision

CLELLAN CJ

The applicant was born on 24 October 1955. She was therefore something over 44 years of age at the date of the murder. She has been in custody since then. She is now almost 51 years of age. Were I considering the matter afresh, I would have imposed an overall sentence of 45 years with a non-parole period of 33 years. This would have had the effect of enabling the applicant to be considered for release on parole when she was 77 years of age. I think that the Authority and the Council would be well qualified to make an appropriate assessment as to whether she could then be released and, if so, on what conditions.Conclusion The learned sentencing judge made it clear that, in His Honour’s judgment, the culpability of the applicant was so grave as to require a life sentence, quite apart from any considerations of dangerousness. The mere fact that I would not have imposed such a sentence does not permit the conclusion that his Honour was wrong. For the reasons given by McClellan CJ in CL, it cannot be said (despite the qualifications I mentioned at the outset) that there is any error in the judgment of O’Keefe J in this respect. Again, for the reasons given by McClellan CJ at CL, the other grounds of appeal (with the exception mentioned above) should be rejected. Accordingly, I would dismiss the appeal. LATHAM J: I agree with McClellan CJ at CL.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Established by: CLELLAN CJ

Full text does not contain this section.

Citations

AGLC Citation

Knight v R [2006] NSWCCA 292

Most Recent Citation

R v Cardamone [2017] VSC 493

Cases citing this decision · 50 of 57 shown

R v Watson (No 3)
[2022] NSWSC 1693 Para 66

…In R v Knight (2006) 164 A Crim R 126; [2006] NSWCCA 292 (“ Knight ”), McClellan CJ at CL (with whom Adams and Latham JJ agreed) stated at [28]:…
R v Dion
[2021] NSWSC 1043 Para 34

…tter that does affect the assessment of the objective seriousness of the murder of Mr Phetmang is the manner of the disposal of his body ( Knight v R [2006] NSWCCA 292 at [28] per McClellan CJ at CL). Both from a view of the scene and photographs, I was able to inspect the location where the offender left Mr Phetman…
Rogerson v R; McNamara v R
[2021] NSWCCA 160 Para 2

…ng and applying a two-stage test for the application of s 61(1) of the Sentencing Procedure Act as articulated in Knight v R (2006) 164 A Crim R 126; [2006] NSWCCA 292.[536] [536] McNamara submissions, [33]-[34]…
CC v R; R v CC
[2021] NSWCCA 71 Para 46

…then consider whether the subjective circumstances of the offender allows for a lesser sentence than life imprisonment. See, for example, Knight v R [2006] NSWCCA 292; (2006) 164 A Crim R 126 at [23] citing R v Bell (1985) 2 NSWLR 466; R v Valera [2002] NSWCCA 50. See also R v Miles [2002] NSWCCA 276 at [52] and [2…
R v Ney
[2021] NSWSC 529 Para 184

…The principles to be applied when s.61(1) is under consideration were set out in Knight v R (2006) 164 A Crim R 126; [2006] NSWCCA 292 at [23]. It is the combined effect of the four indicia in s.61(1) which is critical. The absence of any one or more of the indicia of retribution, punishment, community protection an…
R v Pham (Sentence)
[2021] NSWSC 528 Para 27

…rites within their faith. The mutilation of the deceased’s body is a feature which adds considerably to the gravity of the crime: Knight v R [2006] NSWCCA 292; (2006) 164 A Crim R 126.…
R v Dufty; R v Tisdell
[2020] NSWSC 1920 Para 78

…a matter which can be taken account of in assessing the objective seriousness of the offending. [5] 5. R v Yeo [2003] NSWSC 315 at [36]; Knight v R [2006] NSWCCA 292; 164 A Crim R 126; at [28]–[29].…
Cardamone v The Queen
[2019] VSCA 190

…s were fixed — see R v Bayley [2013] VSC 313 (‘ Bayley ’); R v Dinsley [2013] VSC 631. [4] R v Stanford [2016] NSWSC 1434; Knight v The Queen [2006] NSWCCA 292; R v Leonard (Unreported, New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal, 7 December 1998); R v Harris (2000) 121 A Crim R 342. [5][1997] 2 VR 446 (‘ Coulston ’).…
R v Khazma
[2019] NSWSC 416 Para 45

…In Knight v R [2006] NSWCCA 292, at [23], McClellan CJ at CL observed:…
R v Wood
[2018] NSWSC 1855 Para 89

…rely breaks down, can never justify vengeful violence being perpetrated by one party to the relationship upon the other [51] . 49. R v Knight [2006] NSWCCA 292; (2006) 164 A Crim R 216 at [26]; R v Gonzales [2007] NSWCCA 321; (2007) 178 a Crim R 232 at [175]. 50. ZZ v R [2013] NSWCCA 83 at [99]. 51. R v Rae [2001] N…
R v Holdom
[2018] NSWSC 1677 Para 144

…lty. [57] 57. R v Miles at [213]; R v Thomson; R v Houlton (2000) 49 NSWLR 383; [2000] NSWCCA 309 at [157]-[158]; Knight v R (2006) 164 A Crim R 126; [2006] NSWCCA 292 at [37]…
R v O'Connor
[2018] NSWSC 1734 Para 37

…R 295; [2006] NSWCCA 404 at [34]; R v Thomson; R v Houlton (2000) 49 NSWLR 383; [2000] NSWCCA 309 at [157]-[158]; Knight v R (2006) 164 A Crim R 126; [2006] NSWCCA 292 at [37]. … [121] Even if there is some prospect of rehabilitation there have been cases in which life sentences have been imposed: R v Baker (Court o…
R v Ronald Edward Medich (No. 43)
[2018] NSWSC 886 Para 139

…In Knight v R [142] McClellan CJ at CL set out a number of principles applicable to the operation of s 61(1). They include the following: 142. [2006] NSWCCA 292; 164 A Crim R 126 at [23].…
R v JK
[2018] NSWSC 250

…less than the maximum even in cases where the offender is liable to a maximum penalty of imprisonment for life. 186. In Knight v R [2006] NSWCCA 292 McClellan CJ at CL (with whom Adams and Latham JJ agreed)said that the operation of s 61(1) and s 21(1) required a “two stage approach” stating at [23]: “23 Firstly,co…
R v Fesus (No. 9)
[2018] NSWSC 176 Para 92

…in attaching precise labels to a particular offence so as to seek to identify “an ordinary domestic murder” : Knight v R (2006) 164 A Crim R 126; [2006] NSWCCA 292 at 140-141 [26]. The Court has not accepted that a category of family or domestic murder should be devised: Gonzales v R (2007) 178 A Crim R 232; [2007]…
R v Micheal Martin
[2018] NSWSC 84

…impose a penalty less than the maximum even in cases where the offender is liable to a maximum penalty of imprisonment for life. In Knight v R [2006] NSWCCA 292 McClellan CJ at CL (with whom Adams and Latham JJ agreed)said that the operation of s 61(1) and s 21(1) required a “two stage approach” stating at [23]: “2…
R v Barrett
[2017] NSWSC 1802 Para 150

…idence to be his good friend, and is relevant to the assessment of seriousness: R v Yeo [2003] NSWSC 315 at [36]; Knight v R (2006) 164 A Crim R 126; [2006] NSWCCA 292 at [28].…
R v LN; R v AW (No. 10)
[2017] NSWSC 1387 Para 5

…The principles to be applied when s.61(1) is under consideration were set out in Knight v R (2006) 164 A Crim R 126; [2006] NSWCCA 292 at 139-140 [23]. It is the combined effect of the four indicia in s.61(1) which is critical, and the absence of any one or more of the indicia of retribution, punishment, community p…
R v Cardamone
[2017] VSC 493 Para 1

…on-parole periods were fixed – see R v Bayley [2013] VSC 295 and R v Dinsley [2013] VSC 631. [9] R v Vincent Stanford [2016[ NSWSC 1434; Knight v R [2006] NSWCCA 292; R v Richard Williams Leonard NSWCCA 7 (Unreported) 7 Dec 1998; R v Mathew James Harris (2000) 121 A Crim R 342.…
R v Farhad Qaumi, Mumtaz Qaumi & Jamil Qaumi (Sentence)
[2017] NSWSC 774

…ght v R [2006] NSWCCA 292 Lowe v The Queen (1984) 154 CLR 606; [1984] HCA 46 McIntosh v R [2015] NSWCCA 184 Majid v R [2010] NSWCCA 121 Markarian v The Queen (2005) 228 CLR 357; [2005] HCA 25 May v R [2012] NSWCCA 111 Muldrock v The Queen (2011) 244 CLR 120; [2011] HCA 39 Olbrich v The Queen (1999) 199 CLR 270; [199…
R v Droudis (No 16)
[2017] NSWSC 20 Para 61

…Offender. This act forms part of the circumstances of the offence so as to be capable of bearing upon the objective gravity of the crime: Knight v R [2006] NSWCCA 292; 164 A Crim 126 at 141 [28]-[29]; R v Wilkinson (No. 5) [2009] NSWSC 432 at [61].…
R v Stanford, Vincent
[2016] NSWSC 1434 Para 119

…R 295; [2006] NSWCCA 404 at [34]; R v Thomson; R v Houlton (2000) 49 NSWLR 383; [2000] NSWCCA 309 at [157]-[158]; Knight v R (2006) 164 A Crim R 126; [2006] NSWCCA 292 at [37].…
R v Rogerson; R v McNamara (No 57)
[2016] NSWSC 1207 Para 231

…In Knight v R (2006) 164 A Crim R 126; [2006] NSWCCA 292, McClellan CJ at CL made the following observations regarding the operation of s.61(1) (at [23]):…
Panetta v R
[2016] NSWCCA 85 Para 64

…view, those actions are particularly significant and can be taken into account in assessing the objective seriousness of the offence: Knight v R [2006] NSWCCA 292; (2006) 164 A Crim R 126 at [28] per McClellan CJ at CL (Latham and Adams JJ agreeing) citing R v Yeo [2002] NSWSC 315 at [36] per James J; R v Garforth…
Dean v R
[2015] NSWCCA 307 Para 71

…In Knight v R [2006] NSWCCA 292; (2006) 164 A Crim R 126, McClellan CJ at CL (with whom Adams and Latham JJ agreed) articulated the following principles in relation to s 61(1) (at [23]):…
R v Stenberg
[2013] NSWSC 1858 Para 1

…to Mr Kelly's home. In Richardson v R [2013] NSWCCA 218 it was explained by reference to observations made in R v Yeo [2003] NSWSC 314 and Knight v R [2006] NSWCCA 292 that dismemberment of a victim's body and the disposal of parts of the body, although not ingredients of the crime of murder, are relevant to the ove…
Richardson v The Queen
[2013] NSWCCA 218

…FP v R [2012] NSWCCA 182 Gebara v R [2012] NSWCCA 107 ES v R (No 1) [2010] NSWCCA 197 KJS v R [2013] NSWCCA 132 R v Baker [2000] NSWCCA 85 Knight v R [2006] NSWCCA 292; 164 A Crim R 126 R v Yeo [2003] NSWSC 315 Ryan v R [2009] NSWCCA 183 Yang v R [2012] NSWCCA 49; 219 A Crim R 550 Category: Principal judgment Partie…
R v Abrahams
[2013] NSWSC 952 Para 1

…conduct of an offender following the death of a victim, depending on that conduct, can be an aggravating circumstance of a murder offence: Knight v R [2006] NSWCCA 292; (2006) 164 A Crim R 126. However where, as here, the offender's conduct is separately charged, a separate punishment must be imposed without the off…
R v Sean Lee King
[2013] NSWSC 801 Para 1

…e present case. Further, for the purposes of sentencing, there is no specific category of " domestic murder" or "relationship murder" (see R v Knight [2006] NSWCCA 292; (2006) 164 A Crim R 216 at [26]; see also R v Gonzales [2007] NSWCCA 321; (2007) 178 A Crim R 232 at [175]).…
R v Naden
[2013] NSWSC 759 Para 1

…been found. In my view, the dismemberment of Ms Nolan's body increases the objective seriousness of the murder: R v Yeo [2003] NSWSC 315; Knight v R [2006] NSWCCA 292; (2006) 164 A Crim R 126.…
R v Stani-Reginald
[2013] NSWSC 567 Para 1

…four indicia may make it more difficult for the conclusion to be reached that a life sentence is required, but will not be determinative: Knight v R [2006] NSWCCA 292; (2006) 164 A Crim R 126 at [23].…
R v Mathew Aquilina
[2013] NSWSC 525 Para 1

…ion, on two separate occasions, in the treatment of the deceased's body following his death is also an aggravating factor (see for example Knight v R [2006] NSWCCA 292; R v Yeo [2003] NSWSC 315). However, I am not satisfied that the deceased's body had been mutilated by the removal of his genitalia. Even if I were i…
R v Purtill
[2012] NSWSC 1475 Para 1

…It is well established that an offender's treatment of a deceased's body can amount to an aggravating factor: see for example Knight v R [2006] NSWCCA 292; (2006) 164 A Crim R 126; R v Yeo [2003] NSWSC 315; (2006) A Crim R 126. This principle has been extended to cases where the treatment of a deceased's body by an…
R v David Comber
[2012] NSWSC 1502 Para 1

…parate occasions, in the treatment of the deceased's body at Sandy Hill following his death is also an aggravating factor (see for example Knight v R [2006] NSWCCA 292; R v Yeo [2003] NSWSC 315).…
R v Karen Dawson
[2012] NSWSC 1497 Para 1

…cipation, on two separate occasions, in the treatment of the deceased's body following his death is an aggravating factor (see for example Knight v R [2006] NSWCCA 292; R v Yeo [2003] NSWSC 315).…
R v Richard James Walsh
[2012] NSWSC 1399 Para 1

…red remains. It is well established that an offender's treatment of a deceased's body can amount to an aggravating factor: see for example Knight v R [2006] NSWCCA 292; R v Yeo [2003] NSWSC 315.…
R v Marcus John Lee
[2012] NSWSC 1240 Para 1

…It is well established that an offender's treatment of a deceased's body can amount to an aggravating factor: see for example Knight v R [2006] NSWCCA 292; R v Yeo [2003] NSWSC 315. This principle has been extended to cases where the treatment of a deceased's body by an offender did not involve any form of mutilatio…
Beldon v R
[2012] NSWCCA 194 Para 32

…] NSWCCA 310; 58 NSWLR 589 (special leave to appeal refused: SLD v The Queen [2004] HCA Trans 501); R v Johnson [2005] NSWCCA 186 at [13]; Knight v R [2006] NSWCCA 292; 164 A Crim R 126 at 141 [30]; Adanguidi v R [2006] NSWCCA 404; 167 A Crim R 295 at 309 [55]; R v Willmott [2012] NSWSC 824 at [30].…
R v Brooks
[2012] NSWSC 505 Para 1

…In Knight v R [2006] NSWCCA 292; 164 A Crim R 126, this Court reviewed the operation of s 61 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act . McClellan CJ at CL said at [23]:…
R v Richardson
[2012] NSWSC 521 Para 1

…aken into account in assessing the seriousness of the offence: R v Yeo [2003] NSWSC 315 at [36]; R v Knight (2006) 164 A Crim R 126 at [28] and [29]; [2006] NSWCCA 292. The offender's meticulous and disturbing dissection of his former companion into smaller parts to be dumped unceremoniously in the bush requires tha…
R v Marsh
[2012] NSWSC 208 Para 1

…four indicia may make it more difficult for the conclusion to be reached that a life sentence is required, but will not be determinative: Knight v R [2006] NSWCCA 292; (2006) 164 A Crim R 126 at [23].…
Felicite v The Queen
[2011] VSCA 274 Para 1

…p exists, or that there is a particular range or ‘commonly accepted pattern’ for sentencing in ‘domestic murder’ cases.[7] [7] Knight v R [2006] NSWCCA 292, [26] (McClellan CJ at CL); R v Whitmore [1999] NSWCCA 75, [16] (Grove J, with Mason P and James J agreeing); R v Rosevear [1999] NSWSC 732, [23] (Studdert J); R…
R v Goundar
[2010] NSWSC 1170

…v Chhay (1994) 72 A Crim R 1 R v Morabito (1992) 62 A Crim R 82 R v Alexander (1994) 78 A Crim R 141 R v Khan (1996) 86 A Crim R 552 Knight v Regina [2006] NSWCCA 292; (2006) 164 A Crim R 126 R v Previtera (1997) 94 A Crim R 76 R v Green [1999] NSWCCA 97 R v Ibrahim [2009] NSWCCA 15 PARTIES: Regina Munesh Pravin Go…
R v Dong
[2010] NSWSC 1242

…1(1), s 21A(3)(b), s 21A(3)(c), s 21A(2)(c), s 21A(3)(e) s 21A(3)(f), s 21A(3)(i), s 21A(3)(g)-(h) s 61(1) CATEGORY: Sentence CASES CITED: Knight v R [2006] NSWCCA 292 R v Clarke [2009] NSWCCA 49 R v Isaacs (1997) 41 NSWLR 374 R v Merritt (2004) 146 A Crim R 309 R v Pilley (1991) 56 A Crim R 202 R v Previtera (1997)…
R v McGuren
[2010] NSWSC 744

…conclusion of evidence in trial LEGISLATION CITED: Crimes Act 1900 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 CATEGORY: Sentence CASES CITED: Knight v R [2006] NSWCCA 292; 164 A Crim R 126 R v McEvoy [2010] NSWCCA 110 R v McNaughton [2006] NSWCCA 242; 66 NSWLR 566 R v Way [2004] NSWCCA 131; (2004) 60 NSWLR 168 PARTIES:…
R v BW & SW (No 3)
[2009] NSWSC 1043

…t 1999 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 Crimes Act 1900 CATEGORY: Principal judgment CASES CITED: Burrell v R [2009] NSWCCA 163 Knight v Regina [2006] NSWCCA 292 R v Ali [2005] NSWSC 334 R v Ainsworth (1994) 76 A Crim R 127 R v BW & SW (No.2) [2009] NSWSC 595 R v Chung [1999] NSWCCA 330 R v Dodd (1991) 57 A Cr…
Burrell v The Queen
[2009] NSWCCA 163

…House v R [1936] HCA 40; (1936) 55 CLR 499 Ibbs v The Queen (1987) 163 CLR 447 Knight v Regina [2006] NSWCCA 292; 164 A Crim R 126 M v R [1994] HCA 63; (1994) 181 CLR 487 MFA v R [2002] HCA 53; (2002) 213 CLR 606 Minniti v R [2006] NSWCCA 30; 159 A Crim R 394; 196 FLR 431 Plomp v R [1963] HCA 44; (1963) 110 CLR 234…
R v Gilham
[2009] NSWSC 138

…murder of parents 15 years ago. LEGISLATION CITED: Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 - s 61 CATEGORY: Principal judgment CASES CITED: Knight v R [2006] NSWCCA 292 Gonzales vR [2007] NSWCCA 321 R v Twala (NSWCCA, unreported 3 November 1994) PARTIES: Regina v Jeffrey Gilham FILE NUMBER(S): SC 2006/2766 COUNSEL: C…
Regina v Adam Patrick Owens
[2008] NSWSC 1375

…ing factors LEGISLATION CITED: Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 CATEGORY: Principal judgment CASES CITED: Apps v R [2006] NSWCCA 290 Knight v R [2006] NSWCCA 292 R v Barbetta [2008] NSWSC 688 R v Christov (No 2) [2006] NSWSC 1179 R v Merritt [2004] NSWCCA 19 R v O’Connor [2008] NSWSC 1297 R v Previtera (1997)…
R v Michael KUTSCHERA
[2008] NSWSC 1271

…SLATION CITED: Crimes Act 1900 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 CATEGORY: Principal judgment CASES CITED: Apps v R [2006] NSWCCA 290 Knight v R [2006] NSWCCA 292; 164 A Crim R 126 Murnin v R (Court of Criminal Appeal, 16 August 1985, unreported) R v Hall [2001] NSWCCA 202 R v Holton [2004] NSWCCA 214 R v Nguye…

View all 57 citing cases →

Cases cited in this decision · 11 of 11 shown

Benitez v R
[2006] NSWCCA 21 Para 15

…Engert (1995) 84 A Crim R 67 at [68] and [71]; Regina v Letteri (NSWCCA unreported 18 March 1992 at [12]); Regina v Benitez [2006] NSWCCA 21 at [39].”…
R v Sutton
[2004] NSWCCA 225 Para 14

…he Crown case when considering the plea and in this respect his Honour may have erred: R v Thomson and Houlton (2000) 49 NSWLR 371 at 416; R v Sutton [2004] NSWCCA 225 at [12]. However, the error was of no moment. His Honour was satisfied that in any event the circumstances relating to the offence and the offender w…
Weininger v The Queen
[2003] HCA 14 Para 21

…although he was mindful of her previous violent behaviour. There is no difficulty in this approach to the sentence: see Weininger v The Queen (2003) 212 CLR 629. As I have indicated the findings that the applicant had been violent towards her former partners were open. That they were relevant to the sentencing task c…
R v Merritt
[2002] NSWSC 1159

…it is the combined effect of the four indicia in s 61(1) which is critical: R v Merritt (2004) 59 NSWLR 557.…
R v SLD
[2002] NSWSC 758 Para 7

…ubmission. It is now settled that the sentencing judge does not have to be satisfied of the risk of re-offending beyond reasonable doubt: R v SLD (2003) 58 NSWLR 589. To my mind there was more than sufficient evidence to justify his Honour’s conclusion in this case. As his Honour found, the evidence reveals a pattern…
R v Miles
[2002] NSWCCA 276 Para 14

…ircumstances relating to the offence and the offender were such that the plea of guilty could not justify any discount of her sentence. see R v Miles [2002] NSWCCA 276; R v Kalache [2000] NSWCCA 2; R v Thomson and Houlton (2000) 49 NSWLR 383 at [157]. That finding was clearly open to his Honour and in my view was co…
R v Valera
[2002] NSWCCA 50

…hen consideration is given to whether the subjective circumstances of the offender require a lesser sentence: R v Bell (1985) 2 NSWLR 466; R v Valera [2002] NSWCCA 50.…
R v Thomson; R v Houlton
[2000] NSWCCA 383 Para 14

…plea of guilty could not justify any discount of her sentence. see R v Miles [2002] NSWCCA 276; R v Kalache [2000] NSWCCA 2; R v Thomson and Houlton (2000) 49 NSWLR 383 at [157]. That finding was clearly open to his Honour and in my view was correct.…
R v Kalache
[2000] NSWCCA 2 Para 14

…fence and the offender were such that the plea of guilty could not justify any discount of her sentence. see R v Miles [2002] NSWCCA 276; R v Kalache [2000] NSWCCA 2; R v Thomson and Houlton (2000) 49 NSWLR 383 at [157]. That finding was clearly open to his Honour and in my view was correct.…
Veen v The Queen (No 2)
[1988] HCA 14 Para 3

…ion of any offence for the same reason the courts have been reluctant to define the elements which comprise a worst case: Veen v The Queen (No 2) (1968) 164 CLR 465 at 478. However, there are present in the applicant’s case a number of features which in my opinion justify its categorisation as being in the worst clas…
Ibbs v the Queen
[1987] HCA 46

…of murder, life imprisonment, is intended for cases falling within the worst category of case for which that penalty is prescribed: Ibbs v The Queen (1987) 163 CLR 447 at 451-452.…

Legislation cited in this decision · 4

Crimes (Administration of Sentencing) Act 1999 (NSW)
1 mention
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW)
1 mention (from Para 6)
Crimes Act 1900 (ACT)
1 mention (from Para 1)
Drug Court Act 1998 (NSW)
1 mention (from Para 10)