R v Cunningham - [2006] NSWSC 1335

CITATION: R v DWC [2006] NSWSC 1335
This decision has been amended. Please see the end of the judgment for a list of the amendments.

HEARING DATE(S): 18/10/2006, 10/11/2006

JUDGMENT DATE :
8 December 2006

JUDGMENT OF: Howie J at 1

DECISION: For the offence of inflicting grievous bodily harm with intent against AO the offender is sentenced to a non-parole period of 7 1/2 years with a balance of term of 2 1/2 years to commence on 18 June 2005. The non-parole period is to expire on 17 December 2012. For the offence of inflicting grievous bodily harm with intent against DO he is sentenced to a non-parole period of 7 1/2 years with a balance of term of 2 1/2 years to commence on 18 June 2007. The non-parole period is to expire on 17 December 2014. For the murder of SO he is sentenced to a non-parole period of 14 1/2 years to commence on 18 June 2009 with a balance of term of 4 1/2 years. The non-parole period is to expire on 17 December 2023. For the murder of KAO and taking into account the matter on the Form 1, he is sentenced to a non-parole period of 21 years with a balance of term of 8 years to commence on 18 June 2014. The non-parole period is to expire on 17 June 2035. The total term is to expire on 17 June 2043.

LEGISLATION CITED: Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987 - s 11
Crimes Act 1900 - s 33
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 - s 61(1)

CASES CITED: Aslett v R [2006] NSWCCA 360
R v Harris (200) 50 NSWLR 409
R v McNaughton [2006] NSWCCA 242
R v Villa [2005] NSWCCA 4

PARTIES: Regina v DWC

FILE NUMBER(S): SC 2006/416

COUNSEL: W. Creasey - Crown
P. Zahra SC - Offender

SOLICITORS: S. Kavanagh - Crown
S. O'Connor - Offender

IN THE SUPREME COURT
OF NEW SOUTH WALES
COMMON LAW DIVISION

HOWIE J

FRIDAY 8 DECEMBER 2006

2006/416 REGINA v DWC
REMARKS ON SENTENCE

1 HIS HONOUR: In this matter the offender and his victims cannot be named because to do so would identify two persons who are children. Neither their names nor any material that would identify them can be published as to do so would be a breach of s 11 of the Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987.

2 On 1 August 2006 the offender was arraigned before Mr Justice James on an indictment alleging two counts of murder and two counts of attempted murder with alternative counts of maliciously inflict grievous bodily harm with intent to inflict grievous bodily harm contrary to s 33 of the Crimes Act. He pleaded guilty to each of the counts of murder and guilty to the alternative counts under s 33. The Crown accepted those pleas in full discharge of the indictment. The maximum penalty for murder is life imprisonment. There is a standard non-parole period specified of 20 years imprisonment.…

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 Cunningham

Details

AGLC: R v Cunningham [2006] NSWSC 1335
Case: [2006] NSWSC 1335
Decision Date: 8 December 2006

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Supreme Court of New South Wales, Howie J delivered a judgment in the case of Regina v DWC, concerning the sentencing of the offender, DWC, for multiple serious offences. The offender pleaded guilty to two counts of murder, and two counts of inflicting grievous bodily harm with intent, arising from a violent incident on 17 June 2005 where he killed his ex-partner, KAO, and her father, SO, and seriously injured her mother, DO, and daughter, AO. The court found that while the offender had an intention to kill KAO, there was no intent to kill SO. The court considered the offender's background, which included a history of alcohol abuse and anger management issues, but ultimately determined that these factors did not significantly mitigate the seriousness of the crimes. The court imposed a non-parole period of 21 years for the murder of KAO, 14½ years for the murder of SO, 7½ years for the grievous bodily harm to AO, and 7½ years for the grievous bodily harm to DO, with the sentences to run concurrently. The total term for the offender was set to expire on 17 June 2043. The court emphasized the need for general deterrence in cases of domestic violence and considered the significant impact of the offences on the victims and their families.

Orders