R v CRAIG JOHN BELL
[2005] ACTSC 123 (1 December 2005)
SENTENCE – domestic violence – conflicting accounts – no lawful excuse or mitigatory factors – prior assault convictions – link with alcohol – impact of domestic violence on women and children – link with later criminality.
No. SC 267 of 2004
Judge: Higgins CJ
Supreme Court of the ACT
Date: 1 December 2005
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE )
) No. SC 267 of 2004
AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY )
R
v
CRAIG JOHN BELL
ORDER
Judge: Higgins CJ
Date: 1 December 2005
Place: Canberra
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
The offender be sentenced to two and half years imprisonment and be eligible for parole at the expiration of 18 months. Having regard to time spent in custody that sentence is to commence on 23 September 2004.
Craig John Bell has pleaded guilty to one count alleging that on 17 September 2004 he assaulted Kerrill Gail Hann occasioning to her actual bodily harm.
There is a factual dispute concerning the circumstances surrounding the assault. The offender does not deny the essential elements of it.
Ms Hann gave evidence in the proceedings. She is the mother of two children, a boy aged 12 and a girl aged 10. The offender is their father. The girl has some disabilities and attends a special school. The complainant and the offender lived together in a defacto relationship up until 1997 and, since then have maintained occasional contact.
Ms Hann deposed that, on 17 September 2004, she was “dragged out of bed by the hair of my head”. She had no recollection of events preceding that occurrence for about one month. However, she expressly identified the offender as the person performing that act.
She then hit the floor, she said, “… turned around and I looked up and as I did I was hit twice in the face and he dragged me out by the hair of the head and I was just about on my feet and he hit me again in the face and then he let go; he put his hands around my neck and was saying filthy things and putting his thumbs into my throat with – like this and proceeded to push with his thumbs into my throat … in the windpipe and then he proceeded with pressure and he cut my air supply off. I couldn’t breathe.”
The offender was saying something to the effect of “Slut, I’ll kill you, I’ll kill you.”
She pleaded with the offender to let go, passed out and woke next morning on the bedroom floor.
Thereafter she walked around outside her house. She was in considerable pain. The offender was still about, following and verbally abusing her. Thereafter, to cut the account to its essentials, she reported the assault to police and attended at hospital for treatment of her injuries. Photographs of the complainant, taken on 17, 20 and 22 September 2004, corroborate her account of the nature and extent of her injuries.
Continue reading R v Bell
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- R v Bell [2005] ACTSC 123
- Case
- [2005] ACTSC 123
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The legal issues before the court were the credibility of the testimonies, the applicability of any lawful excuse or mitigating factors, and the relevance of Bell's prior assault convictions. Additionally, the court needed to consider the link between the assaults and alcohol consumption, as well as the broader impact of domestic violence on women and children. The significance of these prior incidents in understanding the potential for future criminal behaviour also had to be evaluated.
In its reasoning, the court found that the evidence against Bell was compelling, despite his denials. There were no mitigating factors or lawful excuses that could be considered in his favour, and his history of similar offences, often associated with alcohol, was a critical factor. The court acknowledged the severe impact of domestic violence and its correlation with future criminal activities. As a result, Bell was sentenced to two and a half years in prison, with eligibility for parole after 18 months. Given the time already served, the sentence was set to commence on 23 September 2004.
Orders
Orders of the court
1.
The offender be sentenced to two and half years imprisonment and be eligible for parole at the expiration of 18 months. Having regard to time spent in custody that sentence is to commence on 23 September 2004.
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.