R v GABOR LASLO ARANYI
[2013] ACTSC 169 (8 August 2013)
Crimes Act 1900 (ACT)
Supreme Court Act 1933 (ACT)
Crimes (Amendment) Bill 1994 (ACT)
Criminal Code 2002 (ACT)
R v Smith (2012) ACT SC146
R v Steurer (2009) ACT SC150
R v Glynn (1994) 33 NSWLR 139; 71 A Crim R 537
EX TEMPORE JUDGMENT
No. SCC 224 of 2012
Judge: Nield AJ
Supreme Court of the ACT
Date: 8 August 2013
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE )
) No. SCC 224 of 2012
AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY )
R
v
Gabor Laslo Aranyi
ORDER
Judge: Nield AJ
Date: 8 August 2013
Place: Canberra
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
The accused is not guilty because of mental impairment.
The accused be detained in custody until the ACT Civil and Administrative Tribunal orders otherwise.
Proceedings stood over to 9:30am on 21 August 2013 for any further evidence and submissions as to the sentence that would have been imposed had the accused been found guilty of the charge.
On 2 April 2012 the accused, Gabor Laslo Aranyi, killed his mother, Ms Otillia Aranyi, by strangling her. The fact that the accused killed his mother and the circumstances in which he killed her are not in dispute. Those circumstances are set out in the Crown’s case statement (Exhibit A). Taken from that statement, supplemented by the report dated 26 July 2012 of Dr SH Allnutt, consultant forensic psychiatrist (Exhibit C), this is what happened.
At about 2 pm on 2 April 2012 the deceased reminded the accused that he had an appointment with the Woden Mental Health Service to keep. He did not intend to keep the appointment. He went into the bathroom of the home in which they lived together to smoke a cigarette. She followed him into the bathroom and tried to pull him out of the bathroom by taking one of his arms. After about 15 minutes he left the bathroom and went into the kitchen. She followed him into the kitchen and tried to push him out of the kitchen. As she was within arm’s reach of him, he grabbed her around her neck with both of his hands, then he tripped her so that she fell on to the kitchen floor and then he applied continuous pressure to her throat with both of his hands until she stopped breathing. Then he left her where she had fallen and he went to the bathroom and had a shower. At some time later he returned to the kitchen with a pillow and he placed the pillow under her head.
At 8.49 pm ACT Ambulance Service sent an ambulance to the home in which the deceased and the accused had lived together in response to the accused’s telephone call to the service for help for the deceased.
At 8.56 pm two paramedic ambulance officers arrived in the ambulance at the accused’s home. They were taken to the home’s kitchen by the accused where they found the body of the deceased…
Continue reading R v Aranyi
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- R v GABOR LASLO ARANYI [2013] ACTSC 169 (8 August 2013)
- Case
- [2013] ACTSC 169
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court was tasked with determining whether Aranyi was indeed mentally impaired at the time of the offence and, if so, whether this impairment absolved him of criminal responsibility. The legal issues before the court involved interpreting the criteria for mental impairment under the Crimes Act 1900 (ACT) and assessing the evidence provided to establish the defendant's mental state.
The court found that Aranyi was indeed suffering from a significant mental impairment at the time of the offence, which rendered him unfit to be held criminally liable. The decision was based on expert psychiatric evidence that demonstrated Aranyi's substantial cognitive dysfunction and inability to understand the nature and quality of his act or to know that it was wrong. Consequently, the court acquitted the accused on the basis of mental impairment and ordered his detention pending further orders from the ACT Civil and Administrative Tribunal. The court also stood over the proceedings to allow for any additional evidence or submissions regarding sentencing, should the outcome have been different.
Orders
Orders of the court
1. The accused is not guilty because of mental impairment.
2. The accused be detained in custody until the ACT Civil and Administrative Tribunal orders otherwise.
3. Proceedings stood over to 9:30am on 21 August 2013 for any further evidence and submissions as to the sentence that would have been imposed had the accused been found guilty of the charge.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.