Legal Research
Cases
R v Beowulf (No 2)

R v Beowulf (No 2)

Case [2019] ACTSC 82 29 March 2019

Type to search within this case.

SUPREME COURT OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY

Case Title:	R v Beowulf (No 2)
Citation:	[2019] ACTSC 82
Hearing Date:	28 March 2019
DecisionDate:	29 March 2019
Before:	Murrell CJ
Decision:	No case application for verdict of not guilty is refused. A non-publication order applies to this judgment until the end of the trial.
Catchwords:	CRIMINAL LAW – JURISDICTION, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Application for a verdict of not guilty under s 287 of Crimes Act 1900 (ACT) – Where the co-accused are each charged with murder by way of joint commission – Where the prosecution case is entirely circumstantial – Whether there is evidence of agreement between the accused to commit an offence – Whether there is evidence of causation – Whether taken at its highest the evidence is capable of supporting a verdict of guilty
Legislation Cited:	Crimes Act 1900 (ACT) ss 12, 287 Criminal Code 2002 (ACT) s 45A Juries Act 1967 (ACT) s 31A(4) Juries Act 2000 (Vic)
Cases Cited:	Attorney-General’s Reference (No 1 of 1983) (1983) 2 VR 10 Barca v The Queen (1975) 133 CLR 82 Case Stated by DPP (No 2) of 1993 (1993) 70 A Crim R 323 Director of Public Prosecutions Reference No 1 of 2017 [2019] HCA 9 Doney v The Queen (1990) 171 CLR 207 R v Baden-Clay [2016] HCA 35; 258 CLR 308 R v Bilick (1984) 36 SASR 322 R v Hillier [2007] HCA 13; 228 CLR 618 R v JMR (1991) 57 A Crim R 39 R v LK [2010] HCA 17; 241 CLR 177 R v PL [2009] NSWCCA 256; 261 ALR 365 R v R (1989) 18 NSWLR 74 Royall v The Queen (1990) 172 CLR 378 Shepherd v The Queen (1990) 170 CLR 573
Parties:	The Queen (Crown) Melissa Beowulf (Accused) Thorsten Beowulf (Accused) Bjorn Beowulf (Accused)
Representation:	Counsel Ms M Jones and Mr T Hickey (Crown) Mr J Sabharwal (Accused Melissa Beowulf) Mr K Archer and Ms J Campbell (Accused Thorsten Beowulf) Ms B Morrisoe (Accused Bjorn Beowulf)
Solicitors ACT Director of Public Prosecutions (Crown) Rachel Bird and Co (Accused Melissa Beowulf) Legal Aid ACT (Accused Thorsten Beowulf and Bjorn Beowulf)
File Numbers:	SCC 345 of 2017; SCC 346 of 2017; SCC 347 of 2017

Murrell CJ

The accused are being tried by a jury for the offence that, on 12 October 2015 at 3 Beagle Street, Red Hill, a residence that was then occupied by the accused and Katherine Panin (the deceased), they murdered the deceased.

Melissa Beowulf is the deceased’s daughter-in-law. Thorsten and Bjorn Beowulf are Melissa’s children and the deceased’s grandchildren.

At the conclusion of the prosecution case, each accused submitted that there was no case to answer.

Pursuant to s 287 of the Crimes Act 1900 (ACT) (Crimes Act):

287Power of judge to record verdict of acquittal
(1)If, on the trial of a person for an offence against this Act or any other territory law, the judge would have power…

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 R v Beowulf (No 2)

Details

AGLC: R v Beowulf (No 2) [2019] ACTSC 82
Case: [2019] ACTSC 82
Decision Date: 29 March 2019

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v Beowulf (No 2) arose in the Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory where the accused, along with a co-accused, were facing charges of murder. The prosecution's case against the accused was purely circumstantial, relying on a combination of indirect evidence to establish the elements of the offence. The court was required to determine whether the prosecution had presented sufficient evidence to support a verdict of guilty beyond reasonable doubt, particularly in relation to the elements of agreement to commit an offence and causation.

The primary legal issues before the court were whether there was any evidence of an agreement between the accused to commit the offence and whether the evidence, when considered at its highest, could support a verdict of guilt. The court examined the prosecution's case, including the circumstantial evidence presented, and considered whether it was reasonable to infer that the accused had committed the offence jointly with the co-accused. The court also assessed the strength of the prosecution's argument that the evidence, even at its highest, was capable of supporting a guilty verdict.

The court found that the prosecution had presented sufficient evidence to establish the elements of the offence. The evidence, when considered at its highest, was capable of supporting a verdict of guilt beyond reasonable doubt. Consequently, the application for a verdict of not guilty was refused. The court also noted that a non-publication order would apply to this judgment until the conclusion of the trial, preventing the dissemination of details that could prejudice the proceedings.

In summary, the court upheld the prosecution's case and determined that there was sufficient evidence to proceed to trial. The accused's application for a verdict of not guilty was dismissed, and the non-publication order remains in effect until the trial concludes.

Orders

Orders of the court

No case application for verdict of not guilty is refused.

A non-publication order applies to this judgment until the end of the trial.

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.

Citations

AGLC Citation

R v Beowulf (No 2) [2019] ACTSC 82

Most Recent Citation

Bakes v Alexander [2022] ACTMC 10

Cases citing this decision · 2 of 2 shown

John XXIII College v SMA
[2022] ACTCA 32

…kins as Trustee for the iSpin Family Trust [2020] ACTCA 2; 15 ACTLR 233 Dong v Song [2019] ACTSC 82 Erlich v Leifer [2015] VSC 499 FFF v BBB [2017] VSCA 156 Fox v Percy [2003] HCA 22; 214 CLR 118 Gann v Hosny [2017] VSCA 303 Graham Barclay Oysters v Ryan [2002] HCA 54; 211 CLR 540 Hamilton v Whitehead (1988) 166 C…
Bakes v Alexander
[2022] ACTMC 10 Para 1

…Murrell CJ, in R v Beowulf (No 2) [2019] ACTSC 82, summarised the key features of the test applicable to a submission that there is no case to answer: [8] On a no case application, the question is whether, taken at its highest, the evidence is capable of supporting a verdict of guilty. As recently as 20 March 2019…

View all 2 citing cases →

Cases cited in this decision · 12 of 12 shown

Director of Public Prosecutions Reference No 1 of 2017
[2019] HCA 9 Para 1

…n a no case submission is whether there is evidence capable of supporting a verdict of guilty: Director of Public Prosecutions Reference No 1 of 2017 [2019] HCA 9 at [10] (the 2019 Reference Decision ).…
R v Baden-Clay
[2016] HCA 35 Para 1

…sion. In relation to the role of intermediate factual conclusions, see Shepherd v The Queen (1990) 170 CLR 573 per Dawson J at 579 and R v Baden-Clay [2016] HCA 35; 258 CLR 308 ( Baden-Clay ) at [46]–[47], referring to principles and cases considered in Barca v The Queen (1975) 133 CLR 82 at 104.…
R v LK
[2010] HCA 17 Para 1

…ether, taken at its highest, the evidence is capable of supporting a verdict of guilty: Doney v The Queen (1990) 171 CLR 207 at 212 ( Doney ); R v LK [2010] HCA 17; 241 CLR 177 per French CJ at [29]. As recently as 20 March 2019, the High Court stated that the test on a no case submission is whether there is evi…
R v PL
[2009] NSWCCA 256 Para 1

…Nor is it necessary for the Crown to identify the precise act of an accused that has caused the death of the deceased: R v PL [2009] NSWCCA 256; 261 ALR 365 at [46]-[49] per Spigelman CJ (McClellan CJ at CL and RA Hulme J agreeing). However, where the precise act cannot be identified, it may be more difficult to est…
Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions v Rodney William Bradley
[2009] ACTCA 5 Para 1

…In DPP (Cth) v Bradley [2009] ACTCA 5; 3 ACTLR 159, a reference appeal from a directed acquittal in a circumstantial evidence case, the Court of Appeal approved observations that had been made by King CJ in Bilick , stating at [59]:…
R v Hillier
[2007] HCA 13 Para 1

…eks to prove that, on the basis of the established circumstances, the only reasonable hypothesis is that the accused is guilty of murder: R v Hillier [2007] HCA 13; 228 CLR 618. As in most circumstantial evidence cases, the prosecution seeks to infer intermediate facts from which it argues that, ultimately, the…
R v PL
[2000] NSWSC 918 Para 1

…Nor is it necessary for the Crown to identify the precise act of an accused that has caused the death of the deceased: R v PL [2009] NSWCCA 256; 261 ALR 365 at [46]-[49] per Spigelman CJ (McClellan CJ at CL and RA Hulme J agreeing). However, where the precise act cannot be identified, it may be more difficult…
Royall v The Queen
[1991] HCA 27 Para 1

…A Hulme J agreeing). However, where the precise act cannot be identified, it may be more difficult to establish intention to kill: Royall v The Queen (1990) 172 CLR 378 per Brennan J at 404-405.…
Shepherd v The Queen
[1990] HCA 56 Para 1

…s is that each accused is guilty of murder by joint commission. In relation to the role of intermediate factual conclusions, see Shepherd v The Queen (1990) 170 CLR 573 per Dawson J at 579 and R v Baden-Clay [2016] HCA 35; 258 CLR 308 ( Baden-Clay ) at [46]–[47], referring to principles and cases considered in Barca…
Doney v The Queen
[1990] HCA 51 Para 1

…On a no case application, the question is whether, taken at its highest, the evidence is capable of supporting a verdict of guilty: Doney v The Queen (1990) 171 CLR 207 at 212 ( Doney ); R v LK [2010] HCA 17; 241 CLR 177 per French CJ at [29]. As recently as 20 March 2019, the High Court stated that the test on a no…
Royall v The Queen
[1990] HCATrans 270 Para 1

…llan CJ at CL and RA Hulme J agreeing). However, where the precise act cannot be identified, it may be more difficult to establish intention to kill: Royall v The Queen (1990) 172 CLR 378 per Brennan J at 404-405.…
Barca v the Queen
[1975] HCA 42 Para 1

…at 579 and R v Baden-Clay [2016] HCA 35; 258 CLR 308 ( Baden-Clay ) at [46]–[47], referring to principles and cases considered in Barca v The Queen (1975) 133 CLR 82 at 104.…

Legislation cited in this decision · 3

Crimes Act 1900 (ACT)
12, 287 3 mentions (from Para 1)
Juries Act 1967 (ACT)
31A(4) 1 mention (from Para 1)
Juries Act 2000 (Vic)
1 mention (from Para 1)