R v Rowe - [2007] NSWSC 300

CITATION: R v Rowe [2007] NSWSC 300
This decision has been amended. Please see the end of the judgment for a list of the amendments.

HEARING DATE(S): 01/02/2007

JUDGMENT DATE :
5 April 2007

JUDGMENT OF: Howie J at 1

DECISION: The offender is sentenced to a term of imprisonment consisting of a non-parole period of 3 years with a balance of term of 2 years and 6 months. The sentence is to commence on 5 May 2005 and the offender is eligible to be released to parole on 4 May 2008.

CATCHWORDS: Criminal Law - Sentence - Manslaughter after trial - death of baby due to methodone toxicity - unlawful and dangerous act.

CASES CITED: R v Hoerler [2004] NSWCCA 184
R v Blakeney (NSWCCA, unreported, 15 December 1994)
R v Marshall [2003] NSWSC 448

PARTIES: Regina v Helena Jane Rowe

FILE NUMBER(S): SC 2006/646

COUNSEL: T. Hoyle SC - Crown
B. Rigg - Offender

SOLICITORS: S. Kavanagh - Crown
S. O'Connor - Offender

IN THE SUPREME COURT
OF NEW SOUTH WALES
COMMON LAW DIVISION
CRIMINAL LIST

HOWIE J

THURSDAY 5 APRIL 2007

2006/646 REGINA v HELENA JANE ROWE
REMARKS ON SENTENCE

1 HIS HONOUR: On 23 October 2006 the offender was arraigned before a jury on a charge of murdering her son, an infant aged 7 months. The child died on 16 January 2004 as a result of the ingestion of methadone. The offender pleaded not guilty and was subsequently convicted by the jury of manslaughter. It now falls to this Court to sentence her for this crime, the maximum penalty for which is 25 years imprisonment.

2 The offender was a long-term drug addict who had been taking methadone for some time before conceiving the child. The child was born methadone-dependent on 20 July 2004. He remained in hospital, being treated for his drug dependency, for six weeks until 31 August. The offender and her child then lived in a unit at Kingswood. They were supported by numerous agencies in the community including the Department of Community Services (DOCS) and the Probation and Parole Service. The offender was receiving methadone under a programme run by the Gateway Clinic.

3 The offender was in a relationship with the child’s father, Brendon Galwey, who resided in a unit at Mortdale. On occasions Mr Galwey would visit the offender in Kingswood and sometimes stay the night. The relationship however was a stormy one but it seems that the father was as loving to the child as was the offender. Mr Galway was addicted to amphetamine and on occasions the offender would use this drug in his company after the birth of the child.

4 The offender was unreliable in attendance at the Gateway Clinic and on occasions was refused methadone for various reasons. She would then purchase the drug from a source she had in the community. Therefore, at times she had methadone available in the unit. On at least two occasions the offender had been given information about…

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 Rowe

Details

AGLC: R v Rowe [2007] NSWSC 300
Case: [2007] NSWSC 300
Decision Date: 5 April 2007

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v Rowe involved a defendant, Rowe, who was convicted of manslaughter following the death of his infant child due to methodone toxicity. The matter was heard in the relevant Australian court, which examined the circumstances surrounding the death and the subsequent criminal liability of the defendant. The crux of the dispute was the appropriate sentence to be imposed on Rowe, taking into consideration the complex interplay of his actions and the tragic outcome.

The legal issues before the court revolved around the characterisation of Rowe's conduct and the appropriate sentencing framework to be applied. Specifically, the court had to determine whether Rowe's actions constituted an unlawful and dangerous act, and if so, what the appropriate sentence would be for manslaughter in these unique circumstances. The court also needed to weigh the culpability of Rowe and the impact of his drug dependency on his actions.

In delivering the judgment, the court carefully considered the nature of the offence and the surrounding circumstances. It was established that Rowe's administration of methodone to his infant, despite knowing the risks associated with the drug, was indeed an unlawful and dangerous act. The court emphasised the importance of holding individuals accountable for their actions, even in cases where the defendant may have been suffering from addiction. The court ultimately determined that the appropriate sentence for Rowe was one that balanced both punitive and rehabilitative objectives, taking into account the tragic consequences of his actions.

The court ordered that Rowe be sentenced to a term of imprisonment, reflecting the gravity of his offence and the need to protect the community. The sentence also included provisions for rehabilitation programs to address Rowe's drug dependency, aiming to reduce the likelihood of similar offences occurring in the future.

Orders