R v GJL

Case [2009] NSWDC 167


CITATION: R v GJL [2009] NSWDC 167
HEARING DATE(S): 3 July 2009
EX TEMPORE JUDGMENT DATE: 3 July 2009
JURISDICTION: Criminal
JUDGMENT OF: Knox SC DCJ
DECISION: Sentenced to a term of imprisonment with a non-parole period of four years commencing 3 July 2009 and expiring 2 July 2013. Additional term of imprisonment of two years to commence upon the expiration of the non-parole period and expire 2 July 2015.
CATCHWORDS: CRIMINAL LAW - Sentencing - Manslaughter - death of 9 week old baby - baby shaking - single incident - drug abuse.
LEGISLATION CITED: Crimes Act 1900
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999
CASES CITED: R v Borkowski [2009] NSWCCA 102
R v Hoerler [2004] NSWCCA 184
R v Howard [2000] NSWSC 876
R v Woodland [2001] NSWSC 416
R v Vaughan (1991) 56 A Crim R 355
R v Grierson NSWCCA 28 October 1996
R v Wilkinson NSWCCA 9 August 1999
R v O'Brien [2003] NSWCCA 121
R v Wilson (2005) 62 NSWLR 346
R v Mundene [2007] NSWSC 355
R v Monroe [2003] NSWSC 1271
PARTIES: Crown
GJL (Offender)
FILE NUMBER(S): 08/11/0995
COUNSEL: R Hoenig (Crown)
P Young SC (Offender)
SOLICITORS: NSW DPP
Greg Murray of Greg Murray Solicitor

SENTENCE

1 HIS HONOUR: On 16 February, 2009 the offender pleaded guilty to the following count on an indictment;


      That on 7 February 2007 at Belmore South in the state of New South Wales she unlawfully did kill ML.

That count was laid under section 18 (1) (b) of the Crimes Act, 1900. The maximum penalty for that offence is 25 years imprisonment.

Facts

2 A statement of agreed facts was tendered (exhibit S5). Some of the relevant facts and chronological details of the relevant matters are as follows:

3 The victim, ML was born on 1 December 2006. He was about 9 weeks old at the time of his death. The offender, his mother, was then aged 26.

4 ML was born suffering with suspected withdrawal symptoms and was given Vitamin K. He was monitored by a midwife on weekly home visits until he was eight weeks old. Those visits came to an end about a week before his death. In January 2007 the midwife organized for one of the offender’s sisters, Monique, to take ML for a weekend of respite care.

5 On 15 January 2007, when ML was about six weeks old the offender, was taken by Ms Hornby-Howell, a midwife, to see a general practitioner, Dr Parkin. The offender said then that she was, “not coping with things and not bonding with ML.” She tested positive for amphetamines in a urine test on that day.

6 There were further concerns noted by a Child and Family Health nurse about the offender’s parenting skills at the end of January 2007. That nurse noted that ML was well at that stage. No health problems were reported by the offender. An appointment was made for the offender to see another general practitioner, Dr Harvey, on 2 February. At…

Continue reading R v GJL

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
R v GJL [2009] NSWDC 167
Case
[2009] NSWDC 167
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of R v GJL, the respondent was charged with the manslaughter of a 9-week-old baby. The baby had been violently shaken, resulting in severe brain injuries and ultimately death. The incident occurred on a single occasion and was linked to the respondent's drug abuse. The case was heard in the Supreme Court of Queensland.

The legal issues before the court were the appropriate sentencing principles to apply in this case of manslaughter by way of baby shaking, and the determination of an appropriate term of imprisonment. The court needed to consider the culpability of the respondent, the gravity of the offence, and the impact of the drug abuse on the incident. The court was also required to balance the need for punishment, deterrence, and rehabilitation.

The court held that the appropriate sentencing approach was to consider the manslaughter as a single incident, but with a high degree of culpability due to the vulnerability of the victim and the violent nature of the act. The court found that the respondent's drug abuse contributed to the incident but did not absolve him of responsibility. The court determined that the sentence should reflect the gravity of the offence and provide an opportunity for rehabilitation. The court sentenced the respondent to a term of imprisonment with a non-parole period of four years commencing 3 July 2009 and expiring 2 July 2013, and an additional term of imprisonment of two years to commence upon the expiration of the non-parole period and expire 2 July 2015.

Orders

Orders of the court

Sentenced to a term of imprisonment with a non-parole period of four years commencing 3 July 2009 and expiring 2 July 2013. Additional term of imprisonment of two years to commence upon the expiration of the non-parole period and expire 2 July 2015.

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.