R v Scott Alexander McDougall

Case [2011] ACTSC 51

R v SCOTT ALEXANDER McDOUGALL
[2011] ACTSC 51 (25 March 2011)

CRIMINAL LAW – trial by judge alone – double murder – self-defence – effect of intoxication – whether the accused perceived threat – response beyond what was necessary – accused’s statements to friend evidencing an intent to kill – verdict of guilty.

Supreme Court Act 1933 (ACT), s 68C
Evidence Act 1995 (Cth), s 184
Crimes Act 1900 (ACT), ss 12, 13, 14
Criminal Code 2002 (ACT), ss 31, 33, 42

Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), s 418

R v Collins [2004] ACTSC 48 (18 June 2004)
Dal Cortivo v The Queen [2010] ACTCA 14 (9 August 2010)

Zecevic v Director of Public Prosecutions (Victoria) (1987) 162 CLR 645

R v Conlon (1993) 69 A Crim R 92
R v Katarzynski  [2002] NSWSC 613 (9 July 2002)

R v Rao [2008] ACTSC 17 (13 March 2008)
R v Bonnick (1977) 66 Cr App Rep 266
R v Dziduch (1990) 47 A Crim R 378
R v Cakovski (2004) 149 A Crim R 21

R v Nguyen (2000) 118 A Crim R 479
R v Porritt [2008] ACTSC 33 (22 April 2008)

No. SCC 293 of 2009

Judge:             Gray J
Supreme Court of the ACT

Date:              25 March 2011   

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE     )
  )          No. SCC 293 of  2009
AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY )

THE QUEEN          

v

SCOTT ALEXANDER McDOUGALL

ORDER

Judge:  Gray J
Date:  25 March 2011   
Place:  Canberra

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

  1. In respect of count 1 of the indictment charging that on 10 September 2008 at Canberra in the Australian Capital Territory Scott Alexander McDougall murdered Struan Bolas, the Court finds the accused guilty.

  1. In respect of count 2 of the indictment charging that on 10 September 2008 at Canberra aforesaid Scott Alexander McDougall murdered Julie Veronica Franco also known as Julie Sarah Tattersall, the Court finds the accused guilty.

  1. Scott Alexander McDougall (the accused) has pleaded not guilty to charges that on 10 September 2008, he murdered Struan Bolas and Julie Veronica Franco also known as Julie Sarah Tattersall, who was generally referred to throughout the trial as Julie Tattersall.  He has pleaded guilty to intentionally causing damage by fire to premises in Downer on the same date.  The bodies of Ms Tattersall and Mr Bolas were found at those premises. 

  1. Mr C Todd appeared as counsel for the prosecution and Mr P Hastings QC with Mr K Archer for the accused.

Trial by judge alone

  1. The accused has elected to be tried by judge alone. Section 68C of the Supreme Court Act 1933 (ACT), sets out the provisions that are to apply in respect of a trial by judge alone. Sitting as a judge alone, I may make any finding that could have been made by a jury as to the guilt of an accused person and any such finding has the same effect as the verdict of a jury. I am required to include in my judgment the principles of law that I…

Continue reading R v Scott Alexander McDougall

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
R v Scott Alexander McDougall [2011] ACTSC 51
Case
[2011] ACTSC 51
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The defendant, Scott Alexander McDougall, was charged with the murders of Struan Bolas and Julie Veronica Franco, occurring on 10 September 2008 in Canberra. The case was heard by a single judge, sitting without a jury, in the Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory. The crux of the dispute was whether McDougall's actions constituted self-defence, particularly considering his level of intoxication at the time of the incident, and if his perception of a threat was genuine. Additionally, the court examined whether McDougall's response to any perceived threat was proportionate and whether his statements to a friend indicated an intent to kill.

The legal issues before the court were multifaceted. Firstly, it had to determine if McDougall's intoxication affected his ability to perceive a genuine threat or to respond proportionately. Secondly, the court needed to assess the credibility of McDougall’s self-defence claim in light of his statements to a friend suggesting an intent to kill. It also had to consider if McDougall’s actions were beyond what was reasonably necessary for self-defence. Lastly, the court evaluated the reliability and weight of the evidence presented, including McDougall's statements and other corroborative evidence.

In delivering the verdict, the court found McDougall guilty on both counts of murder. The judge ruled that McDougall's intoxication did not absolve him of responsibility and that his perception of a threat was not genuine. The court also determined that McDougall's response to any perceived threat was excessive and that his statements to a friend evidenced an intent to kill, thereby negating a self-defence plea. The evidence presented, including McDougall's own words and the circumstances of the incident, led the court to conclude that McDougall was not acting in self-defence and that his actions were premeditated and deliberate.

The court ordered that McDougall be found guilty of both murders. The specific orders included a finding of guilt on count 1 for the murder of Struan Bolas and a finding of guilt on count 2 for the murder of Julie Veronica Franco, also known as Julie Sarah Tattersall.

Orders

Orders of the court

HE COURT ORDERS THAT:

In respect of count 1 of the indictment charging that on 10 September 2008 at Canberra in the Australian Capital Territory Scott Alexander McDougall murdered Struan Bolas, the Court finds the accused guilty.

In respect of count 2 of the indictment charging that on 10 September 2008 at Canberra aforesaid Scott Alexander McDougall murdered Julie Veronica Franco also known as Julie Sarah Tattersall, the Court finds the accused guilty.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.