R v Islam

[2011] ACTSC 32

R v ISA ISLAM
[2011] ACTSC 32 (2 March 2011)

CRIMINAL LAW – attempted murder – stabbing resulting in serious injuries – whether accused had an intention to kill – motive – words and actions of the accused – majority of evidence inconsistent with an intention to kill – verdict of not guilty entered

CRIMINAL LAW – intentionally inflict grievous bodily harm – mental impairment – no suggestion of involuntary action – verdict of guilty entered – whether accused suffering from mental impairment – frontal lobe damage – whether the accused held delusional persecutory beliefs – no evidence sufficient to amount to a mental impairment – verdict of guilty entered

Criminal Code 2002 (ACT), ss 27, 28, 44, 56, 57
Crimes Act 1900 (ACT), ss 12, 19

No. SCC 340 of 2009

Judge:             Mathews AJ
Supreme Court of the ACT

Date:              2 March 2011

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE     )
  )          No. SCC 340 of 2009
AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY )          

R

v

ISA ISLAM

ORDER

Judge:  Mathews AJ
Date:  2 March 2011
Place:  Canberra

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1. A verdict of not guilty be entered in respect of count one.

1. A verdict of guilty be entered in respect of count two.

1. Consequently, no verdict be entered in respect of count three.

1. On 23 November 2010 the accused, Isa Islam, pleaded not guilty on arraignment to the following charges:

FIRST

COUNT

... THAT on the 4^th day of July 2009 at Canberra in the Australian Capital Territory ISA ISLAM attempted to murder ANDREW DYER.

SECOND COUNT

AND FURTHER AND IN THE ALTERNATIVE THAT on the 4^th day of July 2009 at Canberra the aforesaid ISA ISLAM intentionally inflicted grievous bodily harm on ANDREW DYER.

THIRD COUNT

AND FURTHER AND IN THE ALTERNATIVE THAT on the 4^th day of July 2009 at Canberra the aforesaid ISA ISLAM intentionally and unlawfully used against ANDREW DYER and offensive weapon namely, a paring knife, likely to endanger human life.

1. The accused elected to be tried by judge alone and the hearing then proceeded before myself.  The hearing occupied a number of days, with the calling of numerous witnesses, and the tendering of extensive documentary material.

1. The charges relate to an incident which occurred at the Ainslie Shopping Centre on the afternoon of Saturday 4 July 2009.  Much of the evidence given in the Crown case was not disputed.  I shall commence with a description of those parts of the evidence which are not in contention, and then turn to those aspects as to which there is some dispute.

1. As at 4 July 2009 Andrew Dyer was working part-time at Theo’s Takeaway (Theo’s) food shop at the Ainslie Shopping Centre.  He and the accused were known to each other, as both of them were living in Ainslie Village, not far from the shopping centre.  Indeed, until a few months earlier they had been living in the same boarding house, in rooms that were opposite each other.  The extent of their previous…