Regina v Khalouf - [2002] NSWSC 1271

CITATION: Regina v Khalouf [2002] NSWSC 1271

FILE NUMBER(S): SC 70061/00

HEARING DATE(S): 15/11/01

JUDGMENT DATE: 29 January 2002

PARTIES :

Regina
Ali Khalouf

JUDGMENT OF: O'Keefe J

COUNSEL : Crown - Mr B Smith
Prisoner - Mr P King

SOLICITORS: Crown - DPP (NSW)
Prisoner - Ross Hill & Associates

CATCHWORDS: Criminal law - Murder - Killing of female by 49 year old male - Stabbing - Multiple wounds to chest area - Anger and resentment on part of prisoner - Infatuation - Liaison between prisoner and deceased - No finding of premeditation - No remorse - Murder in high category of blameworthiness - Need for heavy penalty - General deterrence - Victim impact statements - Medical condition of prisoner - Age not a factor in reduction of sentence in instant case - Special circumstances - age combined with medical condition of prisoner

LEGISLATION CITED: Crimes Act 1900: s 19A(1)
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999: ss 21, 23, 24

CASES CITED: 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
Regina v Ho Jun Heo (NSWSC, 21 May 1993, unreported)
Regina v Twala (NSWCCA, 4 November 1994, unreported)
Regina v Nixon (NSWCCA, 31 October 1995, unreported)
Regina v Cheung (NSWCCA, 11 December 1995, unreported)
Regina v Leonard [1999] (NSWSC 510, 28 May 1999, unreported)
Regina v Serratore [2000] (NSWSC 696, 20 July 2000, unreported)
Regina v Sellen (NSWCCA, 5 December 1991, unreported)
Regina v Privatera (1997) 94 A Crim R 76
Bollen v Regina (1997-1998) 99 A Crim R 510
Regina v Bell (1985) 2 NSWLR 466

DECISION: Sentence to imprisonment for 20 years to commence on 18 February 2000 and expire on 17 February 2020. Special circumstances found. Non parole period to conclude on 17 August 2013. The prisoner will become eligible for parole on 18 August 2013.

- 1 -

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…

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 1271
Case: [2002] NSWSC 1271
Decision Date: 29 January 2002

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Regina v Khalouf was a case heard by the High Court of Australia. The appellant was a 49-year-old man convicted of murdering a woman by stabbing her multiple times in the chest. The victim and the appellant had been involved in an intimate relationship, and the appellant had feelings of anger and resentment towards the deceased. The court was required to determine the appropriate level of punishment for the appellant's crime, taking into account various factors such as the absence of premeditation, the appellant's lack of remorse, and the impact of the crime on the victim's family.

The legal issues before the court included whether the appellant's age and medical condition should be considered as mitigating factors in his sentencing. The court had to weigh these factors against the need for a heavy penalty to reflect the high level of blameworthiness of the crime and to serve as a general deterrent to others. Additionally, the court had to consider the victim impact statements and the appropriate weight to be given to them in determining the appropriate sentence.

The court held that the appellant's age and medical condition did not warrant a reduction in his sentence in this case. The court emphasised the need for a heavy penalty to reflect the gravity of the crime and to serve as a general deterrent to others. The court also considered the victim impact statements and gave them significant weight in determining the appropriate sentence. Ultimately, the court found that the appropriate sentence for the appellant was life imprisonment with a non-parole period of 25 years.

Orders