R v Nixon - [1999] NSWSC 794

CITATION: R v NIXON [1999] NSWSC 794

CURRENT JURISDICTION: Criminal Division

FILE NUMBER(S): 70064/98

HEARING DATE(S): 29 July 1999

JUDGMENT DATE:
4 August 1999

PARTIES :

REGINA v Luke James NIXON

JUDGMENT OF: Barr J at 1

COUNSEL :
JP Kiely
(Crown)
M King
(Accused)

SOLICITORS:
K Kalda
(Crown)
C McElroy
(Accused)

CATCHWORDS:

DECISION: Not guilty by reason of mental illness

THE SUPREME COURT
OF NEW SOUTH WALES
CRIMINAL DIVISION
GRAHAM BARR J
Wednesday, 4 August 1999
70064/98 - REGINA v Luke James NIXON
JUDGMENT
1   HIS HONOUR: The accused is charged with murdering his mother Karen Louise Nixon. He has pleaded not guilty.
2 Notwithstanding his mental state, to which I shall refer later in this judgment, the accused signed a document on 28 July 1999 under the provisions of s 32 Criminal Procedure Act electing for trial by judge alone. I am satisfied that he received appropriate advice before making his election. I am satisfied that the accused had the mental capacity so to elect.
3   This trial arises out of a series of tragic events which must have distressed the family and friends of the deceased. In order to spare them unnecessary anguish I shall summarise only those facts that are necessary for the Court to reach its verdict. The Court extends it sympathy to the deceased’s family.
4   The deceased’s brother, Mr Paul Barber, drove her home to her flat at Moorebank on Monday 7 October 1996. They had a cup of tea together and when Mr Barber left the premises at about 5.30pm he accidentally left behind a packet of cigarettes.
5   At about 6.45pm a passing motorist noticed a man in the driveway of the deceased’s flat, walking towards it. His appearance was consistent with the appearance of the accused.
6   At about 8.30pm neighbours heard a woman screaming, shouting that she was being raped.
7   At about midnight a taxi driver picked up the accused near the Henry Lawson Drive exit from the M5 tollway at Milperra, a place about a forty-minute walk from the deceased’s flat.
8   The driver was concerned about the mental capacity of the accused because of the way he spoke and because he was wearing only a shirt. He said that he had lost his trousers in the river.
9   The driver took him to an address in Warrawong, a suburb of Wollongong, where two friends of the accused lived. He asked them to lend him $120 for the fare. They noticed that he was dishevelled and shivering and seemed to be under the influence of drugs or alcohol. They asked him whether his mother might lend him the money and he told them that he had not seen her for a long time and did not know where she was living.
10   The deceased was found in her flat at about 8.15am on Tuesday 8 October. She had been stabbed three times. One of the wounds penetrated the heart and caused her death. She was wearing the…

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 Nixon

Details

AGLC: R v Nixon [1999] NSWSC 794
Case: [1999] NSWSC 794
Decision Date: 4 August 1999

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of Regina v Luke James Nixon, the accused was charged with the murder of his mother, Karen Louise Nixon. Luke James Nixon pleaded not guilty to the charge. The case proceeded to trial before Barr J in the Criminal Division of the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The central legal issue was whether Nixon was criminally responsible for the murder given his mental state at the time of the offence. The trial evidence included circumstantial evidence, Nixon's admissions to police, and statements he made to psychiatrists. The court had to determine whether Nixon's mental illness at the time of the offence negated his criminal responsibility.

Barr J found that the evidence established Nixon's presence at the scene of the crime and his intent to kill his mother. However, the court also found that Nixon was suffering from a severe mental illness at the time of the offence which deprived him of the capacity to understand that his actions were wrong. Three psychiatrists testified that Nixon was suffering from a psychotic disorder which caused a defect of reason at the time of the killing. The court accepted the psychiatric evidence and found Nixon not guilty by reason of mental illness. The court ordered that Nixon be detained in a hospital until released by due process of law, in accordance with the Mental Health Act.

Orders