R v Oakley - [2021] VSC 430

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF VICTORIA

AT MELBOURNE

Revised
Not Restricted

CRIMINAL DIVISION

S ECR 2020 0034

THE QUEEN

CAMERON JOHN OAKLEY

---

JUDGE:	Coghlan JA
WHERE HELD:	Melbourne
DATE OF HEARING:	16 April 2021
DATE OF JUDGMENT:	20 July 2021
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	R v Oakley
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2021] VSC 430

---

CRIMINAL LAW – Manslaughter – Sentence – Plea of guilty.

---

APPEARANCES:	Counsel	Solicitors
For the Crown	Mr G. Hayward	Ms A. Hogan, Solicitor of Public Prosecutions
For the Accused	Mr J. Gullaci	Emma Turnbull Lawyers

HIS HONOUR:

Cameron Oakley, on 16 April 2021 you pleaded guilty before me to the manslaughter of Lachlan Hutchins. In setting out the facts I have called heavily upon the Crown opening, which became Exhibit 1 on the plea.

Shortly after 12.19am on 6 August 2019, you stabbed Lachlan Hutchins to the abdomen, flank and neck area five times. After a brief scuffle outside the amenity rooms in Henty Street, Portland.

At about 11.52pm on the preceding day, 5 August, Lachlan Hutchins had arrived in the Woolworths carpark in Henty Street, as the back seat passenger in Colin Parker's Ford sedan. His girlfriend, Chelsea Campbell, was seated in the front passenger seat. Colin parked the car and together the three of them sat in the car waiting for Chelsea Campbell's father to arrive at the nearby bus stop on a V/Line bus from Melbourne.

At about 12.16 am, you parked your distinctive purple Ford sedan in the carpark on Henty Street next to the amenity rooms opposite the Woolworths carpark. You walked into the amenity room through a side door and entered the male toilets. Some ten second later, Lachlan Hutchins walked over Henty Street, passing your parked Ford and then waited outside the side door of the amenity rooms.

At about 12.19 am, you exited the amenity room with a knife concealed in your right hand. You walked directly towards Lachlan Hutchins, who was coming towards you, and the two of you began to fight. Lachlan Hutchins swung at you, and you then repeatedly swung at Lachlan Hutchins with a knife, resulting in the five stab wounds to the upper body and neck.

Lachlan Hutchins was able to extricate himself and run across Henty Street to his girlfriend and Colin Parker. They rushed him to the Portland Hospital where he was provided treatment but was pronounced dead at 1.38 am.

The relationship between you and Lachlan Hutchins is of some importance. Chelsea Campbell had known Lachlan Hutchins from when she was about 12 years of age. They began their romantic relationship in mid to late 2018. And together moved in with her father, Blair Campbell, around the same time. They were engaged to be married and had been for some three weeks prior to this incident. Lachlan Hutchins and you had known each other for years and did not get along. Although Chelsea Campbell had a brief relationship with you a year or two before this…

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 Oakley

Details

AGLC: R v Oakley [2021] VSC 430
Case: [2021] VSC 430
Decision Date: 20 July 2021

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of R v Oakley, the defendant pleaded guilty to manslaughter in the Supreme Court of Victoria. The case arose from an incident where the defendant caused the death of another person. The central issue was the appropriate sentence to be imposed following the defendant’s guilty plea. The court had to balance various factors, including the circumstances of the offence, the defendant's background, and the principles of sentencing for manslaughter.

The legal issues before the court included the application of sentencing principles to a manslaughter offence, the appropriate weight to be given to the defendant’s guilty plea, and the role of mitigating factors in determining the sentence. The court needed to consider both the culpability of the defendant and any potential mitigating circumstances that might influence the sentence.

In delivering the judgment, the court highlighted the defendant's guilty plea as a significant mitigating factor, which typically reduces the severity of the sentence. However, the court also considered the gravity of the offence, the defendant's criminal history, and the impact of the offence on the victim’s family. Ultimately, the court determined that while the plea of guilty warranted some reduction in sentence, the circumstances of the offence necessitated a custodial term to reflect the seriousness of the crime. The defendant was sentenced to a period of imprisonment, with specific consideration given to the mitigating factors presented.

Orders