R v Moore - [2020] NSWSC 1561

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Moore [2020] NSWSC 1561
Hearing dates: 3 November 2020
Date of orders: 3 November 2020
Decision date: 03 November 2020
Jurisdiction: Common Law
Before: Johnson J
Decision:
1. In accordance with s.38 Mental Health (Forensic Provisions) Act 1990, the Accused, Benjamin Laurence Moore, is found not guilty of the charge of murder on the grounds of mental illness.
2. In accordance with s.39(1) Mental Health (Forensic Provisions) Act 1990, an order is made that Benjamin Laurence Moore be detained in a correctional facility, or at such other place as may be determined from time to time by the Mental Health Review Tribunal until released by due process of law.
3. In addition:
(a) The Registrar is to notify the Minister for Health, as soon as practicable, of the making of these orders.
(b) The Registrar is to notify the Mental Health Review Tribunal, as soon as practicable, of the making of these orders and is to provide to that Tribunal the following documentation:
(1)   a copy of the Court's reasons for verdict and orders;
(2)   a transcript of the trial;
(3)   a copy of the documents contained within Exhibit A tendered at the trial, including the reports of Dr Nielssen and Dr Martin;
(4)   a copy of the victim impact statements of Emily Stevens, Ruth Lorraine Stevens, Theepa Puvanachandran and Louise Staples, each of which was tendered in the proceedings.
(c) The Registrar is to notify Justice Health, as soon as practicable, of the verdict and orders in this matter and provide to Justice Health copies of the Court's reasons for verdict and orders together with copies of the reports of Dr Nielssen and Dr Martin.

Catchwords:
CRIMINAL LAW - Judge-alone trial - murder - defence of mental illness - accused kills next door neighbour in knife attack - explosive acts of violence occur without provocation or rational explanation - accused with long history of mental illness - chronic schizophrenia - delusions and persecutory beliefs - expert psychiatric evidence unanimously indicates defence of mental illness available - verdict of not guilty by reason of mental illness - victim impact statements received under s.30L Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 - importance of victim impact statements - order that accused be detained under s.39(1) Mental Health (Forensic Provisions) Act 1990

Legislation Cited:
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999
Criminal Procedure Act 1986
Mental Health (Forensic Provisions) Act 1990

Cases Cited:
Fang v R (2018) 97 NSWLR 876; [2018] NSWCCA 210
Hawkins v The Queen (1994) 179 CLR 500; [1994] HCA 28
Lucas v The Queen (1970) 120 CLR 171; [1970] HCA 14
Mizzi v The Queen (1960) 105 CLR 659; [1960] HCA 77
R v Falconer (1990) 171 CLR 30; [1990] HCA 49
R v Hall (1988) 36 A Crim R 368
R v Klamo (2008) 18 VR 644; [2008] VSCA 75
R v Minani (2005) 63 NSWLR 490; [2005] NSWCCA 226
R v…

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 Moore

Details

AGLC: R v Moore [2020] NSWSC 1561
Case: [2020] NSWSC 1561
Decision Date: 03 November 2020

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v Moore involved the accused, Moore, who was charged with the murder of his next-door neighbour, a fatal knife attack. Moore, who had a long history of mental illness, specifically chronic schizophrenia, claimed the defence of mental illness. The case was heard in a court where a single judge presided without a jury.

The legal issues before the court were whether Moore was guilty of murder and, if so, whether the defence of mental illness applied. This required the court to assess the psychiatric evidence presented, which unanimously indicated that Moore's mental illness met the criteria for the defence. The court also had to consider the relevance and impact of victim impact statements under the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999.

The court found that Moore's explosive acts of violence were without provocation or rational explanation and were consistent with his documented mental illness. The unanimous expert psychiatric evidence confirmed Moore's incapacity to understand the nature and quality of his acts or to know that they were wrong. Consequently, the court accepted the defence of mental illness, rendering Moore not guilty by reason of mental illness. The court ordered Moore's detention under the Mental Health (Forensic Provisions) Act 1990, recognising the importance of victim impact statements in the sentencing process.

Orders