Regina v Bilton - [2000] NSWSC 923

CITATION: Regina v Bilton [2000] NSWSC 923

FILE NUMBER(S): SC 70079/99

HEARING DATE(S): 04/09/00, 05/09/00, 06/09/00, 07/09/00, 11/09/00

JUDGMENT DATE: 11 September 2000

PARTIES :

Crown
Paul William Bilton

JUDGMENT OF: Bell J at 1

COUNSEL : N Harrison - Crown
G Cusack, QC - Accused

SOLICITORS: SE O'Connor - Crown
Budd & Piper - Accused

LEGISLATION CITED: Criminal Procedure Act 1986

CASES CITED: R v Moffatt [2000] NSWCCA 174
Royall v The Queen (1990) 172 CLR 378
Wilson v The Queen (1992) 174 CLR 313 @ 334

DECISION: Verdict of guilty of manslaughter entered.

THE SUPREME COURT
OF NEW SOUTH WALES

CRIMINAL DIVISION

BELL J
Monday, 11 September 2000

70079/99 - REGINA v Paul William BILTON

JUDGMENT
1 HER HONOUR: Paul William Bilton was arraigned before me on 5 September 2000 on an indictment which charged him that on 25 February 1998 at Chinderah in the State of New South Wales he did feloniously slay Corey Jessel. In the alternative he was charged that on that date and place he did assault Corey Jessel. He entered a plea of not guilty to the count charging him with manslaughter and guilty to the alternative count charging him with assault. The Crown did not accept this plea in full discharge of the indictment and accordingly the matter proceeded to trial. On 4 September 2000 the accused had elected, pursuant to s16(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act 1986, for trial by judge alone and the Crown consented to the same. The matter proceeded before me without a jury.
2    The deceased Corey Jessel was an infant aged two years, he having been born on 5 January 1996.
3    The area of factual dispute was relatively confined. By consent a number of statements were tendered. Oral evidence was given by Cheryl Jessel, the mother of the deceased. There was short oral evidence from Senior Constable Peter Wilson and Detective Senior Constable Ian Hutchinson. Neither of the latter two witnesses were cross-examined.
4    Two electronically recorded interviews between Detective Hutchinson and the accused, the first dated 26 February 1998 and the second dated 19 March 1998, were tendered without objection.
5    The Crown led evidence from two forensic pathologists, Dr Lawrence and Dr Duflou. Dr Collins, forensic pathologist, was called in the accused's case. It will be necessary to return to the medical evidence in some detail in due course.
6    The accused was aged 29 at the date of the incident. He was living at the Hacienda Caravan Park, Chinderah. He was involved in a romantic relationship with Cheryl Jessel, who was also a resident of the caravan park. Ms Jessel lived in one caravan with Corey, the accused occupied a separate van just across the road from hers.
7    The accused told police that he had been involved in the relationship with Cheryl Jessel for about 12 months prior to 1998. Ms Jessel had been living at the caravan park for about four or five months, but he had known her prior…

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 Regina v Bilton

Details

AGLC: Regina v Bilton [2000] NSWSC 923
Case: [2000] NSWSC 923
Decision Date: 11 September 2000

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In Regina v Bilton, the accused, Paul William Bilton, was tried for the manslaughter of Corey Jessel, a two-year-old child. The central issue before the court was whether the Crown had proven beyond reasonable doubt that the accused's actions in punching and shaking the child were a substantial cause of Corey's death. The court heard evidence from forensic pathologists and the child's mother, Cheryl Jessel, who had a romantic relationship with the accused. The medical evidence indicated that Corey's death was due to non-accidental injury, possibly involving cervical cord injury, but the exact mechanism could not be determined. The accused's account of events conflicted with Cheryl's testimony, particularly regarding the duration and manner of the shaking. The court found that the accused's punch to Corey's chest was both unlawful and dangerous, exposing the child to an appreciable risk of serious harm. The shaking that followed the punch was also considered unlawful and dangerous. The court concluded that the accused's actions were a substantial cause of Corey's death, either through the punch, the shaking, or a combination of both. The court found the accused guilty of manslaughter and directed that a conviction be entered accordingly.

Orders