Legal Research
Cases
R v Poynton (No. 3)

R v Poynton (No. 3)

Case [2017] NSWSC 1772 15 December 2017

Criminal Liability

Mens Rea & Intention

Mental Illness Defence

Substantial Impairment Defence

Criminal Law

No judgment structure available for this case.

Type to search within this case.

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Poynton (No. 3) [2017] NSWSC 1772
Hearing dates: 10 November 2017
Date of orders: 15 December 2017
Decision date: 15 December 2017
Jurisdiction: Common Law
Before: Johnson J - Crime
Decision:
Notice of Motion filed for Accused on 27 October 2017 dismissed.

Catchwords: CRIMINAL LAW - application for trial by Judge alone - Accused charged with two counts of murder - no issue that Accused shot dead each victim with intent to kill - trial issues involve defence of mental illness or partial defence of substantial impairment - issue concerning credibility of Accused’s account given to psychiatrists - substantial impairment involves quintessential jury issue - whether in interests of justice to make order for Judge-alone trial - application refused
Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900
Criminal Procedure Act 1986
Cases Cited:
Landsman v R (2014) 88 NSWLR 543; [2014] NSWCCA 328
Potts v R (2012) 227 A Crim R 217; [2012] NSWCCA 229
R v Belghar [2012] NSWCCA 86; 217 A Crim R 1
R v Bretherton [2013] NSWSC 1036
R v Fang (No. 3) [2017] NSWSC 28
R v Haydar [2017] NSWSC 127
R v Jamal (2008) 72 NSWLR 258; [2008] NSWCCA 177
R v McNeil [2015] NSWSC 357
R v Obeid [2015] NSWSC 897
R v Poynton [2016] NSWSC 1623
R v Poynton [2016] NSWSC 615
R v Stanley [2013] NSWCCA 124
R v Villalon [2013] NSWSC 1516
Texts Cited: ---
Category: Procedural and other rulings
Parties: Regina (Crown)
Daniel Poynton (Accused)
Representation:
Counsel:
Mr J Crespo (Crown)
Mr EW Wilson SC (Accused)
Solicitors:
Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (Crown)
Legal Aid NSW (Accused)

File Number(s): 2014/336896
Publication restriction: ---

Judgment

JOHNSON J: By Notice of Motion filed on 27 October 2017, the Accused, Daniel Poynton, makes application under s.132 Criminal Procedure Act 1986 to be tried by a Judge alone.
The Crown does not agree to the Accused being tried by a Judge alone. It is necessary for the Court to determine whether an order under s.132 should be made in the circumstances of the case.
The trial of the Accused is listed to commence on 18 June 2018 in Sydney with a four-week estimate.

Hearing of Application

This application was heard on 10 November 2017. The Accused relied upon the affidavit of his solicitor, Robyn Mary Clark, sworn 26 October 2017.
Written and oral submissions were made by Mr Wilson SC, for the Accused, and by Mr Crespo, Crown Prosecutor.

The Charges Against the Accused

The Accused is charged with two counts of murder. He is alleged to have murdered Jamie Edwards and Joelene Joyce at Moama in the State of New South Wales on 12 November 2014.
The Crown Case Statement alleges that the Accused and Jamie Edwards had been close friends for a number of years as well as associates in a drug supply network that predominantly supplied the drug methylamphetamine (or “Ice”) around the Echuca township, near…

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 Poynton (No. 3)

Details

AGLC: R v Poynton (No. 3) [2017] NSWSC 1772
Case: [2017] NSWSC 1772
Decision Date: 15 December 2017

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v Poynton (No. 3) involved the accused, who was charged with two counts of murder. The dispute centred on the appropriate trial format, given the nature of the defences raised by the accused, specifically the defence of mental illness or the partial defence of substantial impairment. The case was heard in a higher court, where the accused sought a trial by a judge alone rather than a jury. The primary legal issue before the court was whether it was in the interests of justice for the trial to proceed before a judge alone, considering the defences and the evidence presented.

The court had to determine whether the substantial impairment defence, which required assessing the credibility of the accused's account as provided to psychiatrists, constituted a quintessential jury issue. The court also needed to weigh the interests of justice, including the importance of ensuring a fair trial for the accused and the need to balance this with the gravity of the charges. The court concluded that the substantial impairment defence did indeed involve a quintessential jury issue, as it required assessing the accused's credibility and the impact of this on the determination of the defence. Consequently, the application for a trial by a judge alone was refused.

In reaching its decision, the court emphasised the importance of the jury's role in evaluating the credibility of witnesses and the accused's account, particularly in complex cases involving mental health defences. The court determined that it was not in the interests of justice to deprive the accused of the right to have their case assessed by a jury. The final orders of the court were that the application for a trial by a judge alone was dismissed, and the matter proceeded to a jury trial.

Orders