R v Nicol - [2005] NSWSC 547

CITATION:
R v NICOL [2005] NSWSC 547

HEARING DATE(S): 27 May 2005

JUDGMENT DATE :

27 May 2005

JUDGMENT OF:
Hulme J at 1

DECISION:
Ronald Nicol, I sentence you to imprisonment for a non-parole period of 1 year, and a balance of term also of 1 year. I suspend execution of the sentence for a period of 2 years and direct that you be released from custody on condition that you enter a good behaviour bond for a period of 2 years.; I order that the Bond I have referred to be entered into at the Court Registry.

PARTIES:
Regina
Ronald Nicol

FILE NUMBER(S):
SC 2004/2618

COUNSEL:
Crown: Mr J Keily SC
Prisoner: Ms L Flannery

SOLICITORS:
Crown: S Kavanagh
Prisoner: SE O'Connor

LOWER COURT JURISDICTION:

- 1 -

IN THE SUPREME COURT
OF NEW SOUTH WALES
CRIMINAL DIVISION

HULME J

Friday 27 May 2005
2004/2618

REGINA v Ronald NICOL

REMARKS ON SENTENCE

1 HULME J: The Prisoner is 86 years old. He is substantially deaf. On 9 April 2004 he killed his wife, to whom he had been married for 63 years. He was originally charged with murder but an indictment was presented in this Court charging him with manslaughter. To that charge he has pleaded guilty. The basis for charge is that, in the terms of s23A of the Crimes Act, at the time of the events leading to the deceased’s death the Prisoner’s “capacity to understand events, or to judge whether (his) actions were right or wrong or to control himself … was substantially impaired by an abnormality of mind arising from an underlying condition, and the impairment was so substantial as to warrant liability for murder being reduced to manslaughter”. There is a deal of psychiatric evidence supporting that conclusion and, in the circumstances of this case, I approach the matter upon the basis indicated.

2 There is a wealth of evidence, and none to the contrary, that right up until Mrs Nicol’s death the marriage was happy and both persons were devoted to one another. There is equally no doubt that the ravages to health which old age commonly inflicts had affected them both. In consequence of problems with circulation, Mrs Nicol had in late 1999 the front half of her foot amputated. Infection and gangrene occurred and one leg was amputated just above the knee. She had difficulty in adjusting to a prosthetic limb, difficulties which never seemed to have been fully resolved. In the months before her death she had a number of bad falls causing substantial bruising to her face and body. There seem to have been other problems for she took a deal of medication.

3 In the case of the Prisoner, some time after the mid 1990s, both of his children became so concerned about his driving that he was persuaded to give it up. In 2003 he began to experience fainting attacks and was later hospitalised more than once. There was a lessening of his ability or desire…

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 Nicol

Details

AGLC: R v Nicol [2005] NSWSC 547
Case: [2005] NSWSC 547
Decision Date: 27 May 2005

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Supreme Court of New South Wales, Hulme J presided over the case of Regina v Ronald Nicol. Ronald Nicol, who is 86 years old and substantially deaf, was charged with the manslaughter of his wife, to whom he had been married for 63 years. Nicol originally faced a charge of murder but subsequently pleaded guilty to manslaughter under s23A of the Crimes Act, which allows for a reduction in liability for murder to manslaughter when an individual's capacity to understand events or to judge whether their actions were right or wrong or to control themselves was substantially impaired by an abnormality of mind at the time of the offence. The court heard extensive psychiatric evidence supporting the defence of diminished responsibility due to the defendant's underlying condition.

Hulme J considered the evidence of the couple's happy marriage and the ravages of old age that had affected both parties. The court noted that while the couple faced significant health challenges, including Mrs Nicol's amputations and mobility issues, and Mr Nicol's hearing loss and medical conditions, their relationship remained devoted until the tragic event. The court also examined the circumstances surrounding the offence, including the couple's discussions about moving into a nursing home and Mrs Nicol's alleged statements to her husband about wanting to end her life. Nicol's accounts of the events leading to his wife's death, including his intent to kill her and then himself, were meticulously reviewed and accepted as accurate.

In sentencing, Hulme J acknowledged that specific deterrence, protection of the community, and rehabilitation were not relevant due to Nicol's age, health, and otherwise blameless life. The court balanced the principles of general deterrence and retribution with the practicalities of imposing a sentence on an elderly man in poor health. Ultimately, the court decided on a suspended sentence, considering it the most appropriate option given the circumstances. Ronald Nicol was sentenced to imprisonment for a non-parole period of 1 year and a balance of term also of 1 year, with the execution of the sentence suspended for 2 years, subject to the condition that he enter a good behaviour bond for the same period.

Orders