R v Tran

[2019] NSWDC 644

District Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation:	R v Tran [2019] NSWDC 644
Hearing dates:	19, 21, 22 March 2019
Decision date:	26 March 2019
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	Norrish QC DCJ
Decision:	Verdict of “not guilty” Counts 1 and 2 on the grounds of mental illness. Pursuant to s 39 Mental Health (Forensic Provisions) Act 1990 the accused is detained in his current correctional facility or such other facility as the Mental Health Review Tribunal may determine is appropriate until released by due process of law
Catchwords:	Crime – grievous bodily harm with intent to murder – alternate count - with intent to inflict grievous bodily harm - judge alone trial - pursuant to s132A Criminal Procedure Act 1986 -– bizarre and aggressive behaviour – unprovoked attack – mental illness or drug induced psychosis – substance use disorder – schizophrenia – substance induced mental disorder – delusional thinking – hallucinations – differing expert diagnoses
Legislation Cited:	Criminal Procedure Act 1986 Mental Health Act 2007 Mental Health (Forensic Provisions) Act 1990
Cases Cited:	R v De Souza (1997) 41 NSWLR 656 R v Doolan [2010] NSWSC 147. R v Falconer [1990] 171 CLR 30 R v Fang (No 3) [2017] NSWSC28 Fang v R [2018] NSWCCA 210 R v Ham [2009] NSWSC 296 R v Derbin [2000] NSWCCA 361 Radford v R [1985] 42 SASR 266 Stones (1955) 56 SR(NSW) 25
Category:	Principal judgment
Parties:	Regina (Crown) Mr Ngu Ba Tran (Accused)
Representation:	Counsel: Mr Phillips (Crown) Mr Roff (Accused)
File Number(s):	2017/00267942
Publication restriction:	No

Judgment

Trial by Judge alone

INTRODUCTION

1. Last week, the accused, Ngu Ba Tran, was arraigned before me as a Judge sitting alone without a jury in respect in of two charges or counts on the indictment presented.

2. The first count alleges against the accused, that he on 3 September 2017 at Sydney in the State of New South Wales, did cause grievous bodily harm to Shannon Stuart, with intent to murder the said Shannon Stuart. To that charge he pleaded not guilty.

3. The alternative count, Count 2, alleges that at the same place on the same date, he did inflict grievous bodily harm to Shannon Stuart with intent to cause grievous bodily harm to him. To that count the accused pleaded he was not guilty.

4. As follows from what I have said a moment ago, the accused had elected to be tried by a judge sitting alone. That election was opposed by the Crown. It was not a matter of requiring leave pursuant to s 132A because of the generosity of the concession made by the learned Crown Prosecutor. I had in an earlier judgment ruled that I should dispense with the jury and try the matter pursuant to the terms of s 132 Criminal Procedure Act 1986.

OUTLINE OF CROWN CASE

5. With regard to the Crown case against the accused, to summarise it although I will come back to the detail of the evidence after I have dealt with the relevant…