R v AM

In the Supreme Court of South Australia, the defendant, AM, was charged with the attempted murder of her son, L, and, alternatively, with aggravated endangering of life. AM pleaded not guilty to both charges on the basis of mental incompetence. The prosecution conceded that AM was mentally incompetent at the time of the offence but maintained that the objective element of attempted murder had been established. AM argued that the objective element of attempted murder had not been established. Both parties agreed that the matter be determined by a judge sitting without a jury. The court was required to determine whether AM was mentally incompetent at the time of the offence and, if so, whether the objective element of attempted murder had been established.

The court found that AM was suffering from a mental impairment at the time of the offence and that she did not know her conduct was wrong. The court also found that the objective element of attempted murder had been established. Given that AM was found to be mentally incompetent, she could not be held liable for the offence of attempted murder. The court found AM liable to supervision under Part 8A of the Criminal Law Consolidation Act 1935 (SA) for a limiting term to be determined. The court declined to make an order committing AM to detention at that stage, as she was already on home detention bail without incident. The court directed that a report under section 269T of the Act be obtained and noted that reports as required by sections 269Q and 269R of the Act would need to be prepared. The court observed that AM had consistently maintained that she did not intend to kill L and meant him no harm, but rather intended to sedate him so that he was not conscious when she took the overdose.

The court ordered that submissions be made on the issue of an appropriate limiting term during which AM is to be supervised under Part 8A of the Act and the nature of that supervision. The defendant was found not guilty of the offence of attempted murder by reason of mental incompetence. AM was declared liable to supervision under Part 8A of the Criminal Law Consolidation Act 1935 (SA) for a limiting term to be determined. The court declined to make an order committing AM to detention at that stage. The court directed that a report under section 269T of the Act be obtained.