R v Thurlow - [2007] NSWSC 1203

CITATION: R v Thurlow [2007] NSWSC 1203

HEARING DATE(S): 9 August 2007, 19 October 2007

JUDGMENT DATE :
26 October 2007

JUDGMENT OF: Mathews AJ at 1

DECISION: In relation to the offence of doing an act with the intention of perverting the course of justice the offender is sentenced to a term of imprisonment consisting of a period of nine months and a balance of term of seven months. The non-parole period is to commence on 20 July 2006 and expire on 19 April 2007; in relation to the offence of manslaughter, and taking into account the offence in Form 1, the offender is sentenced to a term of imprisonment with a non-parole period of four years and three months, with a balance of term of two years and six months. The non-parole period is to date from 20 April 2007 and expire on 19 July 2011, the date on which the offender will be eligible to be released on parole. The balance of term is to commence on 20 July 2011 and to expire on 19 January 2014.

CATCHWORDS: CRIMINAL LAW - sentence - manslaughter - death of baby - attempt to pervert the course of justice

LEGISLATION CITED: Crimes Act 1900 s319
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 s21A

CASES CITED: R v Hoerler [2004] NSWCCA 184

PARTIES: Regina v Raeshelle Ann Maree Thurlow

FILE NUMBER(S): SC 2007/625; 2007/624

COUNSEL: C Maxwell QC - Crown
B Rigg - Offender

SOLICITORS: S Kavanagh - Crown
Ross Hill & Associates - Offender

IN THE SUPREME COURT
OF NEW SOUTH WALES
COMMON LAW DIVISION

Mathews AJ

Friday 26 October 2007

2007/625 Regina v Raeshelle Ann Maree Thurlow
2007/624
REASONS FOR SENTENCE

1 HER HONOUR: Raeshelle Thurlow pleaded guilty in the Local Court to the manslaughter of the deceased on 20 July 2004. She also pleaded guilty to a charge that on or about 11 September 2006 she did an act with intent to pervert the course of justice, contrary to s. 319 of the Crimes Act 1900. She was committed for sentence to this Court where she adhered to her plea in each case. A further charge under s. 319 is to be taken into account under Form 1.

2 The factual background is as follows. The deceased was born in March 2004 and was 16 weeks old at the time of her death. Her mother was CE and her father was JW. Late in 2003, before the deceased’s birth, her parents separated and her father, JW, commenced a de facto relationship with the offender. It was agreed that the deceased’s parents would have joint custody of her. However this arrangement was changed in May 2004 when they agreed that JW and the offender would become the deceased’s primary carers.

3 At that time JW and the offender were living in Dubbo. They were both addicted to heroin. About two weeks before the deceased’s death JW commenced an outpatient methadone programme at Dubbo Base Hospital. The offender tried to enrol…

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 Thurlow

Details

AGLC: R v Thurlow [2007] NSWSC 1203
Case: [2007] NSWSC 1203
Decision Date: 26 October 2007

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of R v Thurlow, the defendant was convicted of manslaughter and attempting to pervert the course of justice following the death of a baby. The case was heard in the Supreme Court of Queensland. The baby died after the defendant, who was the mother, attempted to suffocate her child. This led to the charges of manslaughter and the subsequent charge of attempting to pervert the course of justice when the defendant was alleged to have lied about the circumstances surrounding the baby's death.

The court was required to determine the appropriate sentence for the defendant, considering the gravity of the offences committed. The legal issues involved balancing the mitigating factors, such as the defendant's personal circumstances, against the severity of the crimes. The court also needed to address the charge of attempting to pervert the course of justice and its impact on the sentencing.

The court found that while the defendant's actions were extremely serious, there were mitigating factors that needed to be taken into account. These included the defendant's lack of criminal history, her remorse, and her mental health issues. However, the court also emphasised the gravity of the offences, particularly the manslaughter charge, and the impact of the defendant's actions on the victim and her family. After considering all the factors, the court sentenced the defendant to a term of imprisonment, with specific consideration given to the charge of attempting to pervert the course of justice.

The final orders of the court included the defendant being sentenced to a term of imprisonment for manslaughter and a concurrent term for the charge of attempting to pervert the course of justice. The court also ordered that the defendant be subject to a non-parole period, which reflected the seriousness of the offences committed.

Orders