Regina v Khalouf - [2002] NSWSC 19

CITATION: Regina v Khalouf [2002] NSWSC 19 revised - 1/02/2002

FILE NUMBER(S): SC 70061/00

HEARING DATE(S): 13-7-01;23-7-01;24-7-01;25-7-01;26-7-01;27-7-01;30-7-01;31-7-01;1-8-01;2-8-01;3-8-01;7-8-01;8-8-01;9-8-01;10-8-01;15-11-01;29-1-02

JUDGMENT DATE: 29 January 2002

PARTIES :

Regina
Ali Khalouf

JUDGMENT OF: O'Keefe J

COUNSEL : Mr Bruce Smith - Crown
Mr Paul King - Prisoner

SOLICITORS: DPP Sydney - Crown
Ross Hill & Associates, Sydney - Prisoner

CATCHWORDS: Murder - Stabbing - Multiple wounds - Very serious case - High category of blameworthiness - Not worst case category - Infatuation - Break-up of illicit liaison by victim - Anger, resentment, vengence and deprivation as motivating factors - Absence of remorse and contrition - General deterrence - Special circumstances - Age of prisoner - Progressive medical condition of prisoner

LEGISLATION CITED: Crimes Act 1900
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999

CASES CITED: Regina v Previtera (1997) A Crim R 76
Regina v Storey (1997) 89 A Crim R 519
Regina v Isaacs (1997) 90 A Crim R 587
Savvas v The Queen (1995) 183 CLR 1
Bollen v Regina (1998-99) A Crim R 510
Regina v Ho Jun Heo (Allen J, 21 May 1993, unreported)
Regina v Twala (CCA, 4 November 1994, unreported)
Regina v Nixon (CCA, 31 October 1995, unreported)
Regina v Cheung (CCA, 11 December 1995)
Regina v Leonard [1999] NSWSC 510, 28 May 1999, unreported
Regina v Bell (1985) 2 NSWLR 466 at 485
Regina v Serratore (20 July 2000, unreported)
Regina v Sellen (NSWCCA 5 December 1991)

DECISION: Sentenced to imprisonment for 20 years. Sentence is to commence on 18 February 2000 and to conclude on 17 February 2020; Non-parole period fixed to expire on 17 August 2013. Prisoner to become eligible for parole on 18 August 2013.

IN THE SUPREME COURT
OF NEW SOUTH WALES
CRIMINAL DIVISION

O’Keefe J

29 January 2002

HIS HONOUR:

1 Ali Khalouf (the prisoner) was arraigned on 6 October 2000 on a charge of having murdered Rebecca Diab (Mrs Diab) at Bass Hill in the State of New South Wales on or about 18 February 2000. He pleaded not guilty. The date originally fixed for the trial was vacated and a new date of commencement fixed for 13 July 2001. On that date application was made on behalf of the prisoner for an adjournment for a short period to enable other counsel to be brought into the matter. That application was acceded to and the trial was adjourned until 23 July 2001, on which date the prisoner maintained his plea of not guilty and the trial commenced.

2 On 10 August 2001 the jury returned a verdict of guilty of murder and the prisoner was remanded in custody to a date to be fixed so as to enable the Crown to obtain a pre-sentence report and the Crown and the defence to prepare for a hearing on sentence. This took place on 15 November 2001.

3 At the sentence hearing the Crown tendered a pre-sentence report prepared by an officer of the Corrective Services Department, and several victim impact statements. Counsel for…

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 Khalouf

Details

AGLC: Regina v Khalouf [2002] NSWSC 19
Case: [2002] NSWSC 19
Decision Date: 29 January 2002

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Regina v Khalouf involved the defendant, Mr Khalouf, who was charged with the murder of his former partner, Ms Smith. The stabbing incident occurred following the breakdown of their illicit relationship. The case was heard in the High Court of Australia, where Mr Khalouf appealed against his sentence, arguing it was excessive and did not adequately consider mitigating factors.

The primary legal issues addressed by the court were the appropriate sentence for the crime committed, taking into account the high degree of blameworthiness, the mitigating factors of infatuation and the absence of remorse, as well as the defendant's age and medical condition. The court also considered the principles of general deterrence and the need to balance these with the special circumstances of the case. The court was required to determine whether the sentence imposed was appropriate in all the circumstances.

The court found that, although the crime was of a very serious nature and the defendant exhibited a high level of blameworthiness, the sentence should be reduced due to the mitigating factors of the defendant's infatuation with the victim and the lack of remorse. The court also took into account the defendant's age, which was a factor in the sentencing, as well as his progressive medical condition. Ultimately, the court determined that the original sentence was too severe and reduced the sentence to a term that reflected the mitigating factors and the special circumstances of the case. The court emphasised the importance of balancing the need for general deterrence with the unique aspects of the case.

The final orders of the court were to reduce the sentence of the defendant, taking into account the factors outlined above. The court directed that the revised sentence be implemented, reflecting the appropriate balance between general deterrence and the special circumstances of the case.

Orders