Legal Research
Cases
R v Drummond-Murray

R v Drummond-Murray

Case [2019] NSWSC 575 16 May 2019

No judgment structure available for this case.

Type to search within this case.

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Drummond-Murray [2019] NSWSC 575
Hearing dates: 13 May 2019
Date of orders: 16 May 2019
Decision date: 16 May 2019
Jurisdiction: Common Law
Before: Wright J
Decision:
1. In respect of count 1, a special verdict that the accused is not guilty on the ground of mental illness is returned.
2. In respect of count 2, a special verdict that the accused is not guilty on the ground of mental illness is returned.
3. In respect of count 3, a special verdict that the accused is not guilty on the ground of mental illness is returned.
4. In respect of count 4, a special verdict that the accused is not guilty on the ground of mental illness is returned.
5. Pursuant to s 39(1) of the Mental Health (Forensic Provisions) Act 1990 (NSW), the accused is to be returned to his present place of custody and detained there, or at such other place as is deemed appropriate according to law, until such time as he is released by due process of law.
6. The Registrar of the Court is to notify the Minister for Health and the Mental Health Review Tribunal of these verdicts and orders.

Catchwords:
CRIMINAL LAW – murder – alternatively, causing grievous bodily harm with intent to murder – assaulting a police constable in the execution of her duties – stealing – defence raised of mental illness –schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder disease of the mind – unanimous opinion of experts that accused did not know actions wrong because of defect of reason from a disease of the mind – verdicts of not guilty on the ground of mental illness
CRIMINAL LAW – murder – alternatively, causing grievous bodily harm with intent to murder – causation of death – whether injuries and consequent tetraplegia caused death almost two years later
Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1990 (NSW)
Evidence Act 1995 (NSW)
Mental Health (Forensic Provisions) Act 1990 (NSW)
Cases Cited: Da-Pra v R; R v Da-Pra [2014] NSWCCA 211
Dunkley-Price v The Queen (2015) 73 MVR 450
Hawkins v The Queen (1994) 179 CLR 500; [1994] HCA 28
M’Naghten’s Case (1843) 10 Cl & Fin 200; 8 ER 718
R v Drummond-Murray [2018] NSWSC 1870
R v Hadler (No 2) [2018] NSWSC 1804
R v Minani (2005) 63 NSWLR 490; [2005] NSWCCA 226
R v Zvonaric (2001) 54 NSWLR 1; [2001] NSWCCA 505
Radford v R (1985) 42 SASR 266
Reynolds v R [2015] NSWCCA 29
Robb v The Queen [2016] VSCA 125
Royall v The Queen (1991) 172 CLR 378; [1991] HCA 27
The King v Porter (1933) 55 CLR 182; [1933] HCA 1
The Queen v Falconer (1990) 171 CLR 30; [1990] HCA 49
Category: Principal judgment
Parties: Regina
Matthew Drummond-Murray (Accused)
Representation:
Counsel:
A Robertson (Crown)
L Brasch (Accused)
Solicitors:
Solicitor for Public Prosecutions (Crown)
Legal Aid NSW (Accused)

File Number(s): 2018/166144

reasons for judgment

Introduction

The accused, Mr Matthew…

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 Drummond-Murray

Details

AGLC: R v Drummond-Murray [2019] NSWSC 575
Case: [2019] NSWSC 575
Decision Date: 16 May 2019

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Supreme Court of Victoria, the case of R v Drummond-Murray involved a complex criminal matter concerning allegations of murder, assault on a police officer, and theft. The accused, Drummond-Murray, was charged with murder, alternatively with causing grievous bodily harm with intent to murder, assaulting a police officer in the execution of her duties, and theft. The case hinged on the accused's mental state at the time of the alleged offences, with the defence asserting that Drummond-Murray suffered from a mental illness, specifically schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder. The court was tasked with determining whether Drummond-Murray's actions were the result of a defect of reason arising from a disease of the mind, which would result in a verdict of not guilty by reason of mental illness.

The primary legal issues before the court were whether Drummond-Murray knew the nature and quality of his actions were wrong due to a disease of the mind, and whether the injuries sustained during the assault on the police officer directly caused his death two years later. The court had to weigh the expert evidence provided by psychiatrists and neurologists to determine the accused's mental state at the relevant times. The experts unanimously concluded that Drummond-Murray did not know his actions were wrong due to a defect of reason arising from a disease of the mind, which was central to the defence's argument.

The court found that the unanimous opinion of the experts was sufficient to establish that Drummond-Murray was not aware that his actions were wrong due to a disease of the mind. Therefore, the court acquitted Drummond-Murray on all charges, rendering verdicts of not guilty by reason of mental illness. The court was satisfied that the defence had met its burden of proving the accused's mental illness at the time of the offences. The court also found that the injuries sustained during the assault on the police officer did not directly cause Drummond-Murray's death two years later, as the intervening period and other medical conditions contributed to his demise.

Orders