R v ZZMM - [2015] VSC 524

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF VICTORIA

Not Restricted

AT MELBOURNE
CRIMINAL DIVISION

S CR 2014 0158

THE QUEEN

ZZMM

Note: this proceeding is subject to a suppression order

---

JUDGE:	RUSH J
WHERE HELD:	Melbourne
DATE OF HEARING:	24 September 2015
DATE OF SENTENCE:	30 September 2015
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	R v ZZMM
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2015] VSC 524

---

CRIMINAL LAW – Sentencing – Infanticide – Plea of guilty – Sentencing considerations – Sentenced to a Community Correction Order for a period of one year with conditions.

---

APPEARANCES:	Counsel	Solicitors
For the Crown	Mr A. Grant	Ms V. Anscombe, Acting Solicitors for Public Prosecutions
For the Accused	Ms H. Spowart	Victorian Legal Aid

HIS HONOUR:

ZZMM, you have pleaded guilty to one charge of infanticide contrary to s 6 of the Crimes Act 1958. The maximum term of imprisonment for infanticide is five years’ imprisonment. As I indicated at the plea hearing on 24 September 2014, I will not impose a custodial sentence.

The charge of infanticide, pursuant to s 6 of the Crimes Act 1958, provides that you are guilty of infanticide, not murder, if your actions or omissions caused the death of your child in circumstances where the balance of your mind was disturbed because of not having fully recovered from the effect of giving birth to that child. The prosecution has accepted your plea of guilty on the basis that at the time of the commission of your offence the balance of your mind was disturbed from the effect of giving birth and because you were not aware that you were pregnant prior to going into labour. I will now detail the background circumstances to your offending.

On Tuesday 25 February 2014, you ate with your sister at a Malaysian restaurant, and attended, but did not actively participate in, a game of basketball. You came home and did not feel well, repeatedly going to the bathroom. In the early hours on Wednesday 26 February 2014, you gave birth to a baby daughter. The gestational age was 36 weeks. She measured 53 centimetres in length and four kilograms in weight. You were not aware that you were pregnant prior to commencing labour. You gave birth alone in your bedroom at your father’s house. You informed police that your daughter, immediately after birth, was moving and made a soft noise. You put your hand over her mouth so as to not wake up your family. You did this for a period of 30 – 60 seconds believing that she would be able to breathe through her nose. The medical evidence before me supports that belief. You then realised that the baby was no longer breathing. You cut the umbilical cord in the hope this would make her breathe. The baby was deceased. Upon realising this, you placed her in a ‘Cotton On’ bag, cleaned your room and went to bed. You subsequently, on the evening of Friday 28 February 2014, left the bag under…

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 ZZMM

Details

AGLC: R v ZZMM [2015] VSC 524
Case: [2015] VSC 524
Decision Date: 30 September 2015

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The matter before the court involved the sentencing of a person who pleaded guilty to a charge of infanticide. The case, known as R v ZZMM, was heard and determined by the relevant court. The defendant, referred to as ZZMM, was found to have committed the offence of killing their infant child under circumstances that qualified as infanticide, as defined by the relevant legislation. The court was tasked with determining the appropriate sentence for this serious offence, considering the defendant's plea of guilty and other relevant factors.

The primary legal issues before the court were the appropriate sentencing considerations for the offence of infanticide and the specific circumstances of the case. The court needed to balance the gravity of the offence with the mitigating factors present, including the defendant's plea of guilty and any other relevant mitigating circumstances. The court also had to consider the principles of sentencing under Australian law, particularly those that apply to offences of this nature.

In delivering the judgment, the court emphasised the seriousness of the offence of infanticide, noting the profound impact on the victim and their family. However, the court also acknowledged the defendant's plea of guilty, which was considered a significant mitigating factor. After weighing all the relevant considerations, the court determined that the appropriate sentence was a Community Correction Order for a period of one year, with specified conditions. This decision reflected a balanced approach, taking into account both the gravity of the offence and the mitigating factors present in the case.

The final orders of the court included the sentencing of the defendant to a Community Correction Order for one year, with specific conditions attached. This decision was made in light of the defendant's plea of guilty and other mitigating factors, while also reflecting the serious nature of the offence committed.

Orders