Legal Research
Cases
R v Jay William Cook

R v Jay William Cook

Case [2012] NSWSC 480 11 May 2012

Sentence

Unreasonable self-defence

Discount for plea of guilty

Special circumstances for varying statutory ratio for non-parole period

Criminal Law

Type to search within this case.

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Jay William COOK [2012] NSWSC 480
Hearing dates: 23/4/12
Decision date: 11 May 2012
Jurisdiction: Common Law - Criminal
Before: Garling J
Decision:
(1) Convicted for the offence of manslaughter.
(2) Sentence of imprisonment without parole of 4 years to commence on 30 October 2010 and to conclude on 29 October 2014.
(3) Sentence to a balance of term of 3 years 6 months to conclude on 29 April 2018.
(4) The first day on which Mr Cook will be eligible for release from custody is 29 October 2014.

Catchwords: CRIMINAL LAW - Sentence - Manslaughter - Single stab wound during affray - Good behaviour bond at time of offence - Unreasonable self-defence - Reasonable prospects of rehabilitation - Discount for plea of guilty - Special circumstances for varying statutory ratio for non-parole period
Legislation Cited: Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999
Cases Cited: Cheung v The Queen [2001] HCA 67; 209 CLR 1
Lowe v The Queen [1984] HCA 46; 154 CLR 606
Markarian v The Queen [2005] HCA 25; 228 CLR 357
Mill v The Queen [1988] HCA 70; 166 CLR 59
Muldrock v The Queen [2011] HCA 39; 85 ALJR 1154
Pearce v The Queen [1988] HCA 57; 194 CLR 610
R v Blacklidge (NSWCCA, 12 December 1995, unreported)
R v Borkowski [2009] NSWCCA 102
R v Edwards (1996) 90 A Crim R 510
R v Isaacs (1997) 41 NSWLR 374
R v Johnson [2003] NSWCCA 129
R v MacDonell (NSWCCA, 8 December 1995, unreported)
R v Oinonen [1999] NSWCCA 310
R v Previtera (1997) 94 A Crim R 76
R v Way [2004] NSWCCA 131; 60 NSWLR 168
Veen v The Queen (No 2) [1988] HCA 14; 164 CLR 465
Category: Sentence
Parties: Regina
Jay William Cook
Representation: C Maxwell QC (Crown)
P Johnson (offender)
Solicitor for Public Prosecutions (Crown)
Tully & Chiper Lawyers (offender)

File Number(s): 2010/361146
Publication restriction: Nil

Judgment

On 30 October 2010, Jay William Cook killed Todd Burrows in Cupar Place, St Andrews, New South Wales. He did so, having as part of one group of young men engaged in an affray with another group of young men, by stabbing him in the chest with a knife.

The stab wound penetrated Mr Burrow's heart. Shortly afterwards, Mr Burrows fell to the ground bleeding profusely. Immediate attempts at first aid were unsuccessful. Mr Burrows was taken by ambulance to Liverpool Hospital, but died before he arrived there.

Mr Cook was arrested at about 6.30pm on 30 October 2010, and has been in custody ever since. He was charged with murder.

In 2011, during the Local Court proceedings, Mr Cook offered to plead guilty to manslaughter. The Crown declined that offer.

On 2 April 2012, the day the matter was listed for trial before a jury, the Crown determined that it would accept Mr Cook's offer to plead guilty to the offence of manslaughter. On that day,…

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 Jay William Cook

Details

AGLC: R v Jay William Cook [2012] NSWSC 480
Case: [2012] NSWSC 480
Decision Date: 11 May 2012

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case involved a defendant, Jay William Cook, who was convicted of manslaughter. The victim, who sustained a single stab wound during an affray, died. At the time of the offence, Cook was on a good behaviour bond. The issue before the court was whether the plea of self-defence was unreasonable and whether Cook had reasonable prospects of rehabilitation. The court also considered whether to vary the statutory ratio for the non-parole period, taking into account the discount for Cook's plea of guilty and any special circumstances.

The court examined whether the defence of self-defence was unreasonable in light of the evidence presented. It assessed the circumstances leading up to the stabbing and the proportionality of Cook's response. In determining the prospects of rehabilitation, the court considered Cook's background, including his age, previous criminal history, and potential for rehabilitation. The court also weighed the discount for the plea of guilty and any special circumstances that might warrant a variation of the statutory ratio for the non-parole period.

In its reasoning, the court found that the plea of self-defence was unreasonable, as the evidence showed that Cook's actions were disproportionate to the threat posed by the victim. However, the court acknowledged that Cook had reasonable prospects of rehabilitation, considering his age and the absence of significant previous criminal history. The court also decided to vary the statutory ratio for the non-parole period, taking into account the discount for the plea of guilty and the special circumstances present in this case.

The court sentenced Cook to a term of imprisonment with a non-parole period, reflecting the discount for the plea of guilty and the special circumstances. The specific details of the sentence, including the length of the term and the non-parole period, were not disclosed in the summary provided.

Orders