R v Donald Paul Yuke - [2010] NSWSC 754

CITATION: R v Donald Paul YUKE [2010] NSWSC 754

HEARING DATE(S): 6-8 July 2010

JUDGMENT DATE :
8 July 2010

JUDGMENT OF: Barr AJ at 1

DECISION: The offender is sentenced to imprisonment with a non-parole period of 14 years which commenced on 29 March 2008 and which will expire on 28 March 2022 and a balance of term of 10 years expiring on 28 March 2032. The first date upon which he will become eligible for release to parole will be 28 March 2022.

CATEGORY: Sentence

PARTIES: Regina, Donald Paul Yuke

FILE NUMBER(S): SC 2009/10527

COUNSEL: C McPherson - Crown
C Bruce - Offender

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

IN THE SUPREME COURT
OF NEW SOUTH WALES
COMMON LAW DIVISION
CRIMINAL LIST

BARR AJ

LISMORE: THURSDAY 8 JULY 2010

2009/10527 REGINA v Donald Paul YUKE
REMARKS ON SENTENCE

1 HIS HONOUR: The offender, Donald Paul Yuke, has been found guilty by the jury of the murder of Lorraine Bolt.

2 The deceased resided with her children at a house at Alstonville. She and the offender had been in an intimate relationship for a few years and the offender used to stay at her house from time to time. He was present at the house on 28 March 2008. The offender habitually drank alcohol to excess. By early evening, both had had a good deal of alcohol to drink and they began to squabble. The offender left the house and went to a sports reserve on the opposite side of the street, where a substantial number of other people had congregated. Most of them were young and most, it seems, were drinking alcohol. During the course of the evening the offender returned to the deceased’s house and then to the reserve. On one occasion he took a large knife from the deceased’s kitchen and had it with him at the reserve. There was an occasion, and perhaps more than one occasion, when the deceased came out of the house and remonstrated publicly with the offender. She accused him of infidelity and he responded in like manner. She offered to fight him. He responded similarly. At 10.30 pm police officers, who had received complaints about the noise coming from the sports reserve, arrived, intending to disperse the group. I am satisfied that by that time the offender was very badly affected by alcohol. His speech was so bad that some could not understand him at all. He was unable to stand, walk or sit properly. Some of the young people asked the police officers for help to carry the offender across the street. An attempt to lift and carry him was abandoned, however, when his helpers realised that he had the knife. The police were unaware of that and left, having required the group to leave the area. Police returned to the sports reserve about an hour later but saw nobody to speak to. I am satisfied that by that time the offender must have returned to…

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 Donald Paul Yuke

Details

AGLC: R v Donald Paul Yuke [2010] NSWSC 754
Case: [2010] NSWSC 754
Decision Date: 8 July 2010

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Supreme Court of New South Wales, the case of Regina v Donald Paul Yuke concerned the murder of Lorraine Bolt by Yuke. The court had to decide whether Yuke had the intention to kill or cause grievous bodily harm when he stabbed the deceased. The evidence suggested Yuke was heavily intoxicated at the time of the stabbing, but the jury found him guilty of murder, concluding that his intoxication did not negate the necessary intent. The court considered various factors in sentencing, including Yuke's intellectual deficit, his history of substance abuse, and his remorse. Despite the severity of the crime, the court decided on a non-parole period of 14 years, reflecting the mitigating circumstances of Yuke's intellectual disability and his potential for rehabilitation. The sentence aims to balance the need for punishment and deterrence with the possibility of Yuke's rehabilitation and reintegration into society.

The court acknowledged Yuke's challenging background, marked by a difficult childhood, intellectual deficits, and chronic substance abuse. These factors were deemed to significantly impair his ability to control his actions and resist the temptation of alcohol. Additionally, the court recognised the support Yuke received from his family and community, which provided some hope for his rehabilitation. The significant intellectual deficit and chronic substance abuse were considered to reduce the need for strong general and personal deterrence. The court also noted Yuke's remorse and his expressed desire to continue his interest in painting as positive indicators of his potential for rehabilitation. The sentence imposed aimed to provide Yuke with an opportunity for rehabilitation while ensuring public safety.

Orders