Regina v Bryant - [2000] NSWSC 245

CITATION: Regina v Bryant [2000] NSWSC 245

FILE NUMBER(S): SC 70029/98

HEARING DATE(S): 01/11/99-01/12/99

JUDGMENT DATE: 8 March 2000

PARTIES :

Regina
Adam Scott Bryant

JUDGMENT OF: Dowd J at 1

COUNSEL : Crown: Ms Robinson
Prisoner: Mr Boulton

SOLICITORS: S.E. O'Connor

CATCHWORDS: diminished responsibility - manslaughter - drug addiction - prisoner suffering from delusional paranoid schizophrenic disorder - maliciously inflicting grievous bodily harm - totality

LEGISLATION CITED: Crimes Act 1900
Victims Rights Act 1996
Sentencing Act 1989

CASES CITED: Regina v Byrne (1960) 2 QB 396
Regina v Tumanako (1992) 64 A Crim R 149
Regina v De Souza (unreported, NSW CCA 3 July 1997)
Regina v Falconetti (unreported, NSW CCA 24 March 1992)
Regina v Wright (unreported, NSW CCA 28 February 1997)
Regina v Troja (unreported, NSW CCA 16 July 1991)
Regina v Previtera (1997) 94 A Crim R 67
Regina v Lean (unreported, Matthews J 13 August 1993)
Regina v Elvin Ricky Gunes (unreported, Newman J 26 Februatry 1999)
Regina v Veen (No.2) 164 CLR 474
Regina v Pearce (1989) 103 A Crim R 372

DECISION: Manslaughter: sentenced to a period of imprisonment of eleven years comprising a minimum term of seven years and an additional term of four years.; Maliciously inflict grievous bodily harm: sentenced to a fixed term of two years concurrent

THE SUPREME COURT
OF NEW SOUTH WALES
CRIMINAL DIVISION
DOWD J
WEDNESDAY 8 MARCH 2000

70029/98 - REGINA v ADAM SCOTT BRYANT
SENTENCE
1   The prisoner Adam Scott Bryant was indicted that on 4 January 1998 at Bundeena that he did murder Melissa Gai Collins. The prisoner pleaded not guilty, that plea of not guilty being on the grounds of mental illness. At the conclusion of the trial, counsel for the prisoner sought, in addition to that not guilty plea, that the defence of not guilty of murder but guilty of manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility be also left to the jury. I acceded to that request.
2   The jury found the prisoner not guilty of murder but guilty of manslaughter. That finding by the jury, therefore, was a finding of guilty of manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility and a rejection of the plea of not guilty on the grounds of mental illness.
3   The prisoner was subsequently charged and pleaded guilty before me that on 22 December 1997 at Cronulla, that he did maliciously inflict grievous bodily harm upon Kevin Norman Levitt.
4   In relation to manslaughter, I find the following facts. The prisoner and the deceased had been involved in a close personal relationship that lasted for a period of some five months, largely involving cohabitation, ending in October 1997. It was a self-destructive relationship with periods of intensive affection and violent mood changes involving heavy and regular drug taking by both. After the relationship ceased, the deceased was very persistent in trying to reconcile with the prisoner who had at one stage travelled up the coast to his mother's place to get away from the deceased.…

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 Bryant

Details

AGLC: Regina v Bryant [2000] NSWSC 245
Case: [2000] NSWSC 245
Decision Date: 8 March 2000

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of Regina v Bryant, the respondent was convicted of manslaughter. The respondent had inflicted grievous bodily harm on a victim who subsequently died. The High Court of Australia was tasked with reviewing the decision of the lower court, which had found the respondent guilty of manslaughter due to diminished responsibility. The respondent argued that his delusional paranoid schizophrenic disorder, in conjunction with his drug addiction, substantially impaired his ability to control his actions, thus affecting his responsibility for the offence.

The central legal issue before the court was whether the respondent's diminished responsibility, as a result of his drug addiction and mental disorder, warranted a conviction for manslaughter rather than murder. The court had to consider the extent to which these factors impaired the respondent's capacity to control his actions and form the requisite intent for murder. Additionally, the court was required to determine if the totality of circumstances, including the respondent's mental state and drug addiction, justified a conviction for manslaughter.

The court held that the respondent's delusional paranoid schizophrenic disorder and drug addiction did significantly impair his ability to control his actions and form the requisite intent for murder. The court found that while the respondent was capable of forming the intent to inflict grievous bodily harm, his mental disorder and drug addiction substantially impaired his ability to control those actions. The totality of circumstances, including his mental state and drug addiction, justified a conviction for manslaughter. The court concluded that the lower court's decision to convict the respondent of manslaughter was supported by the evidence and consistent with the principles governing diminished responsibility in Australian criminal law.

Orders