R v SP

[2006] ACTSC 72

R v SP [2006] ACTSC 72 (12 July 2006)

EX TEMPORE JUDGMENT

No.SCC 79 of 2006

Judge:Madgwick J

Supreme Court of the ACT

Date:12 July 2006

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE)

)No.SCC 79 of 2006

AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY)

BETWEEN:R

AND:SP

ORDER

Judge:Madgwick J

Date:12 July 2006

Place:Canberra

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.No material be published which would identify, or tend to identify the accused, including any reference to identifying the ethnic minority to which she belongs, and any reference to her profession.

1.The accused has been acquitted of a charge of murdering her child of a few days on the ground of mental impairment.Orders of the Court have prevented the public disclosure of her identity.The accused asks that I continue those orders on a permanent basis.This is a difficult matter and somewhat finely balanced.Normally in a case of a fine balance, I would decide it in the interests of full observance of the principle of open justice, even if that be very painful to some individuals.

2.However, by reason of the accused having made out her plea of not guilty based on the ground of mental impairment, the result is that, in the eyes of the law, she has committed no crime.The question therefore becomes: in circumstances where her anonymity has been preserved before a finding that she committed no crime, is she not now entitled to say, as a person innocent in the eyes of the law, ‘Please permit me to get on with my rehabilitation from some of the most painful of events which can befall a human being, without the added pain of being identified to the uncomprehending, the wilfully uncomprehending, the malicious and the prurient, as well as other people?’

3.The evidence before me is that there is a real risk that she might relapse into suicidal ideation.Such a relapse, one would think, would carry with it also some real risk that the ideation might be carried into actuality.As such, I regard the matter as quite exceptional.

4.Consequently, I think that the interests of justice do quite exceptionally call for an order which I now make.That is, that nothing be published which would identify, or tend to identify the accused, including a reference to her the ethnic background, and any reference to her profession.

I certify that the preceding four (4)numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Madgwick.

Associate:

Date:20 July 2006

Counsel for the Crown:Mr R Refshauge SC

Solicitor for the Crown:Director of Public Prosecutions (ACT)

Counsel for the Accused:Mr B J Salmon QC

Solicitor for the Accused:Legal Aid Commission (ACT)

Date of hearing:12 July 2006

Date of judgment:12 July 2006