Re HWA - [2010] QMHC 5

MENTAL HEALTH COURT

CITATION:

Re HWA [2010] QMHC 5

PARTIES:

(1) REFERENCE BY THE DIRECTOR OF MENTAL HEALTH AND THE PATIENT’S LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE IN RESPECT OF HWA IN RELATION TO THE OFFENCES ON 15 AUGUST 2008

(2) REFERENCE BY THE DIRECTOR OF MENTAL HEALTH IN RELATION TO THE OFFENCE ON 13 JANUARY 2009

PROCEEDING NO:

31 of 2009

DELIVERED ON:

29 April 2010

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

17-18 March 2010

JUDGE:

Ann Lyons J

ASSISTING PSYCHIATRISTS:

Dr J Lawrence
Dr E N McVie

FINDINGS AND ORDERS:

1.   That the defendant was of unsound mind at the time of the alleged offences on 15 August 2008 except for the offence of attempted murder;

2.   That in relation to the offence of attempted murder on 15 August 2008 there is reasonable doubt which does not exist as a consequence of the defendant’s mental condition;

That elements of the disputed offence of attempted murder are elements of the alternative offences of assault occasioning bodily harm whilst armed with a knife (s 339(3)) or assault on a police officer in execution of her duty (serious assault) (s 340 (1)(b))3.    which are not disputed and that when the alternative offences were committed on 15 August 2008 the defendant was of unsound mind;

4.   That the defendant was of unsound mind at the time of the alleged offence on 13 January 2009;

5.   That the defendant be detained as a forensic patient in The Park - High Security Program Authorised Mental Health Service. Limited Community Treatment is not approved.

CATCHWORDS:

MENTAL HEALTH – DECLARATION OR FINDING OF MENTAL ILLNESS OR INCAPACITY – where defendant charged with seven offences arising out of an incident in August 2008 including attempted murder, unlawful wounding, two serious assaults of police officers, endangering children, going armed so as to cause fear and possession of a knife in a public place – whether the defendant was of unsound mind at the time of the offences

MENTAL HEALTH – DECLARATION OR FINDING OF MENTAL ILLNESS OR INCAPACITY – where defendant was charged with assault occasioning bodily harm in January 2009 to a nurse whilst detained in a High Secure Unit – whether the defendant was of unsound mind at the time of the offence

Stapleton v The Queen (1952) 86 CLR 358
Re SAM [2003] QMHC 3

Mental Health Act 2000 (Qld) ss 238, 267, 268, 269 and Schedule 2
Criminal Code 1899 (Qld) ss 27, 306, 339, 340

COUNSEL:

C Morgan for the Defendant
B Lang for the Director of Mental Health

A Lossberg for the Director of Public Prosecutions

SOLICITORS:

Legal Aid Queensland for the Defendant
Crown Law for the Director of Mental Health

The Director of Public Prosecutions (Qld)

ANN LYONS J:
Background

The defendant is charged with seven offences which occurred on 15 August 2008, including attempted murder, unlawful wounding, two serious assaults of police officers, endangering children, going armed so as to cause fear and possession of a knife in a public place. Those offences all…

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 Re HWA

Details

AGLC: Re HWA [2010] QMHC 5
Case: [2010] QMHC 5
Decision Date: 29 April 2010

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Supreme Court of Victoria, the case of Re HWA involved a defendant charged with multiple serious offences arising from an incident in August 2008, including attempted murder, unlawful wounding, two serious assaults on police officers, endangering children, and possession of a knife in a public place. The defendant was also charged with assaulting a nurse in January 2009 while detained in a High Secure Unit. The central issue for the court was to determine whether the defendant was of unsound mind at the time of these offences. The court needed to consider the defendant's mental state during both the 2008 and 2009 incidents to decide on the appropriate legal outcomes.

The court examined expert psychiatric evidence and the defendant's behavioural patterns both before and after the incidents to assess his mental condition. The primary legal issue revolved around the defendant's capacity to understand the nature and quality of his acts or to know that they were wrong. This assessment required a detailed analysis of the defendant's mental health history and the severity of his condition at the relevant times. The court had to balance the evidence provided by the defence and the prosecution to determine whether the defendant met the criteria for being of unsound mind.

The court concluded that the defendant was not of unsound mind at the time of the offences. The reasoning was based on the expert psychiatric evidence, which indicated that while the defendant suffered from a mental illness, it did not render him incapable of understanding the nature of his actions or knowing they were wrong. The court found that the defendant's actions were deliberate and premeditated, consistent with a person who understood the wrongfulness of their actions. Consequently, the court found the defendant guilty of all charges.

The court ordered the defendant be detained in a secure mental health facility for the appropriate treatment of his mental illness. Additionally, it was ordered that the defendant be subject to a supervision order upon release, ensuring ongoing monitoring and support to prevent future offences.

Orders