R v Cameron
[2006] VSC 427
•21 August 2006
| IN THE SUPREME COURT OF VICTORIA | Not Restricted | |
AT MELBOURNE
CRIMINAL DIVISION
No. 1438 of 2006
THE QUEEN
v
MICHELLE GRACE CAMERON
---
JUDGE: | Bongiorno J | |
WHERE HELD: | Melbourne | |
DATE OF HEARING: | 21 August 2006 | |
DATE OF JUDGMENT: | 21 August 2006 | |
CASE MAY BE CITED AS: | R v Cameron | |
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION: | [2006] VSC 427 | |
---
CRIMINAL LAW – sentencing – attempted murder – not guilty by reason of mental impairment.
---
APPEARANCES: | Counsel | Solicitors |
| For the Crown | Mr G. Horgan QC | Office of Public Prosecutions |
| For the Accused | Mr J. Desmond | Dwyer Mahon & Robertson |
HIS HONOUR:
In this matter the accused, Michelle Grace Cameron, stands charged with one count of attempted murder to which she has pleaded not guilty on the ground of mental impairment.
That plea has been accepted by the Crown and accordingly, it is necessary for the court to proceed pursuant to s 21(4) of the Crimes (Mental Impairment and Unfitness to be Tried) Act 1997 which requires the judge to hear the evidence and determine whether the court is satisfied that the evidence establishes the defence of mental impairment and enter a verdict as a result of that satisfaction.
This tragic event which occurred on 18 October 2003 involved the mother of two children attempting to strangle the elder of those children, a young girl aged seven. The circumstances are as I have already indicated, tragic and they need to be mentioned only in the summary way that I already have. The facts do not add anything to the event.
The medical evidence before the court from Dr Owens, a psychiatrist at Forensicare, Dr Murphy, a general practitioner who examined the victim, and Dr Michael Lowery who was the Sea Lake doctor who saw the victim initially, together with the report of Dr Eaton from the Bendigo Health Care Group establishes that at the time the facts giving rise to this offence occurred, the accused either did not know the nature and quality of the conduct in which she engaged and/or did not know that the conduct was wrong because she could not reason with a moderate degree of sense and composure about whether the conduct as perceived by reasonable people was wrong.
Accordingly, having regard to her plea and having regard to the fact that the Crown and the defence agree that the plea should be accepted and having read the evidence, I am satisfied as to those matters and accordingly a verdict of not guilty by reason of mental impairment should be recorded by the court as if that were the verdict of a jury.
-
0
0
0