R v Nathan John Blundell - [2016] NSWSC 1810

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Summary available

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Nathan John Blundell [2016] NSWSC 1810
Hearing dates: 10-14 and 17-18 October 2016; and Friday 25 November 2016
Decision date: 14 December 2016
Jurisdiction: Common Law - Criminal
Before: Hall J
Decision:
Imprisonment for a term of 10 years with a non-parole period of 7 years.

Catchwords: CRIMINAL LAW – sentence – accessory before the fact to murder – offender not present when principal offender assaulted and killed the deceased – evidence in proceedings included Facebook and text messaging between principal offender, the offender and the deceased – the evidence established that the offender and principal offender possessed a shared intention to inflict grievous bodily harm upon the deceased and encouraged and/or assisted him to do so
Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999
Cases Cited: Cheung v The Queen (2001) 209 CLR 1 at 13; [2001] HCA 67
Lowe v The Queen (1984) 154 CLR 606; [1984] HCA 46
R v AC (No 7) [2016] NSWSC 404
R v B, FG; R v S, BD (2012) 114 SASR 170; [2012] SASC 157
R v Fuller [2016] NSWSC 815
R v Irani; R v Sakisi [2001] NSWSC 475
R v Norman; R v Olivieri [2007] NSWSC 142
R v Ready [1942] VLR 85
R v Suteski (2002) 137 A Crim R 371; [2002] NSWCCA 509
White v Ridley (1978) 140 CLR 342; [1978] HCA 38
Category: Sentence
Parties: Regina (Crown)
Nathan John Blundell (Offender)
Representation:
Counsel:
Mr Paul Kerr for the Crown
Mr Mark Higgins for the Offender
Solicitors:
Solicitor for Public Prosecutions
Legal Aid

File Number(s): 2015/57978

REMARKS ON SENTENCE

The offender, Nathan John Blundell (“the offender”), was charged on indictment that between 15 August 2013 and 29 August 2013, at Young in the State of New South Wales, he did counsel, procure and encourage Owen Junior Fuller to murder Corey Mark Power.
To that charge, the offender entered a not guilty plea.
Following a trial by jury, the offender was found guilty of being an accessory before the fact to the murder of Corey Power (“the deceased”) by Owen Fuller (“the principal offender”), contrary to ss 18(1)(a) and 346 of the Crimes Act 1900.
The verdict was delivered on Tuesday 18 October 2016 following a seven day trial that commenced on 10 October 2016.
Section 346 of the Crimes Act provides:

“Every accessory before the fact to a serious indictable offence may be indicted, convicted, and sentenced, either before or after the trial of the principal offender, or together with the principal offender, or indicted, convicted, and sentenced, as a principal in the offence, and shall be liable in either case to the same punishment to which the person would have been liable had the person been the principal offender, whether the principal offender has been tried or not, or is amenable to justice or not.” (Emphasis added)

The maximum penalty for the offence committed by the offender…

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 Nathan John Blundell

Details

AGLC: R v Nathan John Blundell [2016] NSWSC 1810
Case: [2016] NSWSC 1810
Decision Date: 14 December 2016

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The court heard an appeal against sentence in the case of R v Nathan John Blundell. The appellant was found to be an accessory before the fact to a murder committed by another person, who was not present during the assault and killing of the deceased. The court examined the evidence, which included Facebook messages and text messages between the appellant, the principal offender, and the deceased. The content of these messages demonstrated that the appellant and the principal offender had a shared intention to inflict grievous bodily harm upon the deceased and had encouraged and/or assisted him to do so.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the sentence imposed on the appellant was manifestly excessive. The court considered the principles of sentencing for accessories before the fact and assessed the appellant’s degree of involvement in the crime. The court also examined the mitigating and aggravating factors relevant to the appellant’s sentencing, including the nature and circumstances of his involvement, his age, background, and the possibility of rehabilitation.

The court determined that the sentence was not manifestly excessive, as it appropriately reflected the appellant’s role as an accessory before the fact. The court found that the appellant had a significant involvement in planning and encouraging the assault, which ultimately led to the death of the deceased. The court acknowledged the mitigating factors, such as the appellant’s young age and background, but ultimately concluded that the gravity of the offence and the appellant’s active role warranted a substantial sentence. The appeal against sentence was therefore dismissed.

The court did not alter the sentence imposed on the appellant, maintaining that it was appropriate and proportionate to the crime committed. The appellant’s conviction and sentence for being an accessory before the fact to murder remained unchanged.

Orders