R v Jackson
[2025] VSC 624
•6 October 2025
| IN THE SUPREME COURT OF VICTORIA | Not Restricted |
AT MELBOURNE
CRIMINAL DIVISION
S ECR 2024 0256
| THE KING |
| v |
| SHANE JACKSON |
---
JUDGE: | Gorton J |
WHERE HELD: | Melbourne |
DATE OF HEARING: | 17 September 2025 |
DATE OF JUDGMENT: | 6 October 2025 |
CASE MAY BE CITED AS: | R v Jackson |
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION: | [2025] VSC 624 |
---
CRIMINAL LAW – Murder – Accused stabbed a man outside house as victim was leaving property – Defence of mental impairment – Where accused has diagnosis of schizophrenia and was experiencing psychosis with delusional belief system that victim intended to harm accused – Where two psychiatrists opined accused could not reason with a moderate degree of sense and composure about whether the conduct, as perceived by reasonable people, was wrong – Defence established – Accused declared liable to supervision – Matter adjourned so that necessary further examination, report and certificate of available services be obtained – Crimes (Mental Impairment and Unfitness to be Tried) Act 1997 (Vic) ss 20, 21, 23.
---
APPEARANCES: | Counsel | Solicitors |
| For the Crown | Mr Jeremy McWilliams | Office of Public Prosecutions |
| For the Accused | Mr Tim Marsh | Angus Cameron Partners |
Contents
A.. Introduction
B.. The accused’s background and medical history
C.. The events leading up to, and of and after, 25 June 2024
D.. Medical opinions and the defence of mental impairment
E... Disposition
HIS HONOUR:
A Introduction
On the afternoon of 25 June 2024, Shane Jackson, the accused, who suffers from schizophrenia, stabbed Joshua Palmer out the front of the accused’s house in Broadmeadows. Mr Palmer died from his injuries. The accused has been charged with Mr Palmer’s murder, and has entered a plea of not guilty to that charge.
Under Part 4 of the Crimes (Mental Impairment and Unfitness to be Tried) Act 1997, a ‘defence of mental impairment’ is established if a person, at the time that they engage in the conduct constituting an offence, was suffering from a mental impairment that had the effect that:
he or she did not know that the conduct was wrong (that is, he or she could not reason with a moderate degree of sense and composure about whether the conduct, as perceived by reasonable people, was wrong).[1]
[1]Crimes (Mental Impairment and Unfitness to be Tried) Act 1997 (Vic), s 20(1)(b).
If a defence of mental impairment is established, the person ‘must be found not guilty because of mental impairment’.[2] The principal consequence of such a finding is that the person may then be made subject to a ‘supervision order’, which can include an order committing that person to custody in a designated mental health service,[3] rather than to a criminal sentence.
[2]Ibid s 20(2).
[3]Ibid s 26(1), (3)(a).
The accused has obtained a report from the psychiatrist Dr Rajan Darjee, and the Crown has obtained a report from the psychiatrist Dr Carolyn Simms. The Crown and the accused agree that the proposed evidence establishes the defence of mental impairment. Because of their agreement, a judge may hear the evidence without a jury and, if satisfied that the evidence establishes the defence of mental impairment, may direct that a verdict of not guilty because of mental impairment be recorded.[4]
[4]Ibid s 21(4).
For the reasons that follow, I am so satisfied and will direct that a verdict of not guilty because of mental impairment be recorded.
B The accused’s background and medical history
The accused is 43 years old. Growing up, he lived with and was raised by his maternal grandparents. His mother, it seems, lived with the accused and his grandparents for a time while the accused was a child, and the accused has continued to maintain a supportive and close relationship with her. His father left when he was two years old. The accused attended a specialist school in Tasmania, before moving to Broadmeadows while still in primary school. He experienced difficulties with reading and writing and left school in Year 9. As a teenager, he smoked cannabis. He also has a history of alcohol abuse, and using heroin, methamphetamine and diazepam. It is reported that he ceased using cannabis approximately five years ago, and no longer drinks alcohol ‘to excess’. As of June 2024, the accused was using methamphetamine several times per week.
In 2008, the accused was found by a neuropsychologist to have an intellectual disability. He was reassessed in 2012 by the same neuropsychologist and was found to have had a ‘deterioration in neuropsychological functioning’ with the change attributed to an assault he suffered, his involvement in a motor vehicle accident, a suicide attempt, and possibly his drug use and his ‘depressed mood with anxiety’. The neuropsychologist also diagnosed an acquired brain injury and mild intellectual disability.
In 2020, the accused was diagnosed with drug induced psychosis, however this diagnosis was changed to schizophrenia due to the ‘ongoing nature’ of his psychotic symptoms. He was admitted to hospital on 12 occasions between 2020 and 2023. During this time, his schizophrenia manifested as persecutory delusions. The accused believed that ‘gangs of people’ were trying to enter his house, steal his belongings, and harm his dogs. He also believed that people were hiding in the roof of his house and ‘monitoring him using electronic devices’. The accused began carrying a knife for protection. During hospital admissions, the accused was described as being ‘distressed, fearful and aggressive’. He was prescribed and began taking antipsychotic medication, but did so inconsistently while he was in the community as he ‘felt he had to be alert and to stay up to protect his property, himself and his dogs’. A photograph of the accused’s property was in evidence. It shows that the accused had erected barriers out of shade cloth, bamboo and cyclone fencing around his home clearly directed at providing, consistently with his illness, some form of protection from people he thought were seeking to invade his home.
C The events leading up to, and of and after, 25 June 2024
During 2024, the accused saw a psychiatric registrar monthly. In May 2024 and in the weeks leading up to the alleged offence, concerns were raised by the accused’s mother and by Corrections Victoria that the accused’s mental health was deteriorating and that he may commit suicide. The accused was also inconsistent in taking his antipsychotic medication, and had been missing appointments. According to a psychiatrist who assessed the accused in custody shortly after the stabbing, the accused had ceased taking his antipsychotic medication (olanzapine) two weeks earlier. A few days before the alleged offending, the accused was hospitalised after developing ulcers, a fever and chills. The cause of this illness is ‘unclear’, but could not be ruled out as being relevant to the accused’s degree of mental impairment on 25 June 2024.[5]
[5]Report of Dr Rajan Darjee dated 8 April 2025, [43].
On 24 June 2024, a friend of the accused, Cory Walk, stayed overnight at the accused’s house. The next morning, on 25 June 2024, Mr Walk observed the accused consume a small quantity of methamphetamine at around 8am when he got out of bed. According to Mr Walk, the accused seemed to be in a good mental state that morning, in the context of the accused having a longstanding diagnosis of schizophrenia.
That afternoon, sometime between 1:30pm and 1:52pm, the deceased approached the accused’s house. The accused and Mr Walk were working on a craft project at the accused’s house at the time. The accused and the deceased both grew up in the Broadmeadows area and had known each other since childhood. The accused was distrustful of the deceased, believing that the deceased had robbed him on multiple occasions. The accused saw the deceased approaching his house and said to Mr Walk: ‘It’s Joshy – can you please tell him to fuck off!’. Mr Walk went outside as the deceased entered through the external fencing, before sitting down and removing his shoes. Mr Walk said to the deceased: ‘Shane doesn’t want you in here, man – you gotta go’. Then, as the deceased was leaving, the accused came out of the house holding a chef’s knife. He shouted at the deceased: ‘I told you not to come here!’. The accused then grabbed the deceased by his shirt and began stabbing him. The deceased collapsed facedown onto the ground. The accused said: ‘See, I told you to tell him to fuck off’.
The accused and Mr Walk went back inside the house, and Mr Walk gathered his belonging and left. He called his girlfriend and said, ‘I think Shane’s stabbed Josh Palmer, he’s not moving’. Mr Walk’s girlfriend called triple zero. Meanwhile, the accused walked down the street to another house where his mother’s friend, Robyn Cameron, lived. The accused banged on Ms Cameron’s door, shouting ‘Ring my Mum’ and ‘I’ve stabbed him, I’ve stabbed him, I’ve killed him – he’s dead’. According to Ms Cameron, the accused was hysterical. She walked the accused back to his house, and saw the deceased curled up on the ground near the letterbox. Ms Cameron also called triple zero. Around this time, Daniel Brooks, the brother of Mr Walk’s girlfriend, arrived at the accused’s house. He saw the accused was crying and told him to go inside the house, which he did.
At about 1:52pm, paramedics arrived at the accused’s residence, with police officers arriving shortly thereafter. The paramedics tried, but could not resuscitate the deceased. On request of the police officers, the accused came out of his house and was arrested. The accused made multiple utterances to Senior Constable Brandon Lees, including:
(a)‘He’s robbed me how many times’;
(b)‘He just keeps coming and burg’n and burg’n and burg’n me… and it’s ended up in something it shouldn’t have’;
(c)‘His name is Joshy’;
(d)‘I came out and he was being a smartass… I warned you, go man… he wouldn’t listen, so I just went and grabbed a blade…’; and
(e)‘Stabbed him in the guts, about two or three times’.
The accused was taken to Broadmeadows Police Station, and participated in a record of interview that was suspended after three minutes so that he could undergo a forensic medical assessment. Some hours later, the accused was examined by Dr Jairus Landolt, who determined that he was unfit to be interviewed and in need of psychiatric care.
The following day, on 26 June 2024, a post mortem was conducted on the deceased. Dr Michael Burke determined that the deceased sustained two stab wounds, one to his torso and another to his left chest near his heart. It is the latter of these wounds that caused the deceased’s death.
Two days after he was remanded in custody, the accused was assessed by a consultant psychiatrist at the Melbourne Assessment Prison who wrote:[6]
Schizophrenia, psychotic relapse in the lead up to arrest due to olanzapine cessation for two weeks and methamphetamine use. Still has ongoing persecutory delusions that people, including the alleged victim, were plotting to enter his home to steal his clothing, food and cordial as part of intimidating him, and of mobile phone being hacked to steal credit. … clearly had auditory hallucinations in the lead up to arrest from the same people including the alleged victim. …
[6]Ibid, [17]-[18].
The applicant then spent 11 days at St Vincent’s Hospital because he became dysphasic and dysarthric and it was thought he had developed an acute neurological condition. On his return to prison towards the end of July 2024, he was described as follows:[7]
… Told me that he is scared and need to be by himself. Said, he was extremely worried about his safety when he came in first and still the situation has not changed for him. Worries that someone will get him, explained that [he] saw his names is written on walls first time when he came (not sure where). Said, he is paranoid and anxious. Said, he was taken down by workers and was bashed. When asked where and when, said, he can’t remember. He was totally confused. Said, what happened outside was all due to his paranoia. Reported history of hearing voices and feeling of being controlled by others sometimes.
[7]Ibid, [21].
D Medical opinions and the defence of mental impairment
Both Dr Darjee and Dr Simms examined the accused and reviewed his medical history including the records of Northern Health where the applicant had been receiving treatment. Both are eminently qualified. Dr Simms became a Fellow of the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists in 2006 and has a Master’s Degree in Psychological Medicine and a certificate in Forensic Behavioural Science. She is currently a consultant psychiatrist employed by the Victoria Institute of Forensic Mental Health (Forensicare). Dr Darjee has worked in forensic psychiatry in Scotland for some 20 years and then in Australia for the last seven years. He is currently a Clinical Director (Psychiatry) at Forensic Behavioural Assessment and Consultation Services, and an Adjunct Associate Professor at the Centre for Forensic Behavioural Science at Swinburne University of Technology. He has worked as a forensic psychiatrist in secure hospital, prison and community settings and has prepared over a thousand expert reports for courts and other bodies in Scotland and Australia. They both provided reports about the accused’s mental state at the time of the deceased’s death. They both also gave oral evidence, and their evidence was to the same effect. Indeed, they both said that they agreed with the other.
Dr Simms opined, in her report, that:
In considering all available information on balance it appears that Mr Jackson was experiencing psychotic symptoms consistent with a relapse of schizophrenia prior to the alleged offending, had been poorly compliant with treatment and follow-up with mental health services. He acknowledged the prior to the alleged offending he had formed the belief that the victim had been one of the people entering his home and stealing things and that he felt the victim posed a threat to him, placing him at risk.
...
It is my opinion that Mr Jackson was acutely psychotic at the time of the alleged offence and, given the nature of his symptoms, was unable to reason with a moderate degree of sense and composure about whether the conduct as perceived by reasonable people was wrong.
Dr Darjee opined, in his report, that:
[Mr Jackson] has clearly had a long-standing substance misuse disorder, but although substance use, particularly his use of methamphetamine, has likely made his symptoms worse and less likely to respond to treatment, his psychotic symptoms are not merely due to the direct effect of substances and are not drug induced.
...
His delusional system is centred around people breaking into his house, messing with his mind, interfering with his life, monitoring and posing a threat to him and his dogs. He believes a group of people have been stealing things, moving things around, spoiling things and interfering with things in his house. They have also entered his roof where he has heard them. He has acted on his delusions by changing the locks, attempting to seal his windows, erecting a barrier outside his home, not using his mobile phone, installing cameras, staying up to protect his house, and staying in his house and avoiding other people. He has also had persecutory beliefs about his neighbours.
...
He was clearly floridly psychotic at the time of the offence. He believed the victim was associated with the people who had been persecuting him and who he had been trying to protect himself and his property from .... it was because of his delusional system, his incorporation of the victim into his delusional system, and his acute fear of and anger towards people (including the victim who was perceived to be identifiable amongst these people) who had been invading his house, interfering with his life and posing a threat to him, that he reacted and acted as he did towards the victim. He was distressed by his perception that the victim was intruding into, invading and violating his property, and posing a threat to him. He found this intolerable, so he acted impulsively by grabbing the knife in stabbing the victim to protect himself in his property, and to make the victim go away and disappear.
...
So in my view, at the time he was suffering from a “disease of the mind” (i.e., schizophrenia, intellectual disability and acquired brain injury), and although he did know the nature and quality of what he was doing (he knew he was stabbing the victim), he did not know that his conduct was wrong, that is, he could not reason with a moderate degree of sense and composure about whether the conduct, as perceived by reasonable people, was wrong. This is because he was acting to protect himself and his property from people he believed to be causing or attempting to cause serious harm to him.
It is easily understandable that a defence of mental impairment would be available to a person who stabs another person whilst under a delusion that that other person intends them serious physical harm, or whilst subject to an auditory or other hallucination that commanded them to commit that violence. I was concerned, however, how a delusional belief that somebody might steal from a person or invade their property would operate to deny to that person an ability to reason with a moderate degree of sense and composure about whether stabbing that person, as perceived by reasonable people, was wrong. Dr Darjee addressed this concern in his oral evidence. According to Dr Darjee, it was significant that here the deceased had been incorporated into the accused’s delusional belief system and the violence took place within that delusional belief system. It was also relevant that the accused had no insight, in the sense that he had no ability to reason that his delusion might not be real but might be the product of his illness. And finally, it must be remembered, he said, that individuals in the midst of a psychotic episode are not able to reason or rationalise like a well person could. In Dr Darjee’s words, in people with schizophrenia there is a ‘break down between the boundaries of reality and themselves’ and that those individuals ‘don’t see where their minds end and where reality starts’. Here, the accused had an ‘inability’ to ‘understand the world as it was‘ and ‘believed that the victim was part of this group of individuals who are doing all these things to him’ and simply was not in a position rationally to understand the threat the deceased posed: ‘his ability to think rationally … was severely impaired and his perception of things about him were completely coloured by this … delusional system’. Dr Darjee ultimately said:
But I think at the time when he [stabbed the victim], I think he believed it was the only option for him and it was morally the right thing to do. And I think it’s difficult when one thinks about the things that he said about what the victim had done, kind of trying to think, well, wait a minute, you know, the victim going into his house and being part of a conspiracy, he didn’t actually deserve that. But, again, I think that’s, that’s kind of looking at him and, and imposing our way of reasoning on him and I don’t think you can do that, because when someone is unwell with schizophrenia, their ability to actually appraise things and think things through with reason … isn’t the same as … us looking at it from the outside. And so, even though from the outside it looks like a disproportionate reaction ... I think subjectively, at that moment, this was… what he felt he needed to do and also what he felt was morally the right thing to do.
I accept the evidence of Dr Simms and Dr Darjee. Accordingly, I conclude that at the time he stabbed Mr Palmer, the accused was in the midst of a psychotic episode that gave rise to the delusional belief system that Mr Palmer was a person who intended the accused harm, and that the accused’s schizophrenic illness and this particular psychotic episode meant that he was then unable to reason with a moderate degree of sense and composure about whether his stabbing Mr Palmer, as perceived by reasonable people, was wrong.
E Disposition
In accordance with s 21(4)(a) of the Crimes (Mental Impairment and Unfitness to be Tried) Act 1997, I will direct that a verdict of not guilty because of mental impairment be recorded.
Subject to hearing further from the parties, I will:
(a)In accordance with s 23(a) of the Crimes (Mental Impairment and Unfitness to be Tried) Act 1997, declare that Mr Jackson is liable to supervision under Part 5 of that Act;
(b)In accordance with s 24(1)(c) of the Crimes (Mental Impairment and Unfitness to be Tried) Act 1997, make an order that Mr Jackson be remanded in custody, pending the making of a supervision order;
(c)Make the other orders necessary to put into place the process of obtaining a report on the accused’s mental condition and a certificate of available facilities and services under ss 41 and 47 of the Crimes (Mental Impairment and Unfitness to be Tried) Act 1997; and
(d)Adjourn the further hearing of the matter to a date to be fixed after the receipt of the certificate of available services for the making of what is likely to be a custodial supervision order.
0
0
0