Regina v Risati Laupama - [2001] NSWSC 1082

CITATION: Regina v Risati LAUPAMA [2001] NSWSC 1082

FILE NUMBER(S): SC 70063/00

HEARING DATE(S): 20/4/01, 7/6/01, 27/7/01

JUDGMENT DATE:
7 December 2001

PARTIES :

Regina
Risati LAUPAMA

JUDGMENT OF: Bell J at 1

COUNSEL : Nicolas Harrison (Crown)
Christopher Bruce (Accused)

SOLICITORS: S E O'Connor
Legal Aid Commission of NSW - T A Murphy

CATCHWORDS: Sentence

LEGISLATION CITED: Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999

CASES CITED: Regina v Barnett (unreported) NSWCCA, 16 February 1994
Regina v Blacklidge (unreported) NSWCCA, 12 December 1995
R v Chayna (unreported) NSWCCA, 8 June 1993
Regina v Dawney [1999] NSWSC 944
Regina v Engert (1995) 84 A Crim R 67
Regina v Grierson (unreported) NSWCCA, 28 October 1996
Regina v Letteri (unreported) NSWCCA, 18 March 1992
Regina v Li [2000] NSWSC 1088
Regina v Previtera (1997) 94 A Crim R 76
R v Woodland [2001] NSWSC 416
R v Barton [2001] NSWCCA 63
Veen (No. 2) v The Queen (1988) 164 CLR 465

DECISION: Twelve years imprisonment to date from 30 December 1999; Non-parole period of eight years; First date eligible for consideration for release to parole is 29 December 2007

IN THE SUPREME COURT
OF NEW SOUTH WALES
CRIMINAL DIVISION

70063/00

BELL J

7 December 2001

REGINA v Risati LAUPAMA

Judgment

: On 20 April 2001 the prisoner was arraigned before me on an indictment charging him with the murder of Tayla Lee Parker on or about 30 December 1999 at Cabarita Beach. To that indictment he pleaded that he was not guilty of murder, but guilty of manslaughter. The Crown accepted that plea in full discharge of the indictment. The basis of the acceptance of the plea to the lesser count was an acknowledgment by the Crown that at the time of the killing the prisoner was suffering from an abnormality of mind such that his responsibility for his act was impaired to a degree so substantial as to warrant his liability for murder being reduced to manslaughter.

2 The prisoner was aged twenty-nine years at the date of the offence. The deceased was the five year old daughter of his former de facto wife, Kelly Lee Parker. At around 1.00am on the morning of 30 December 1999 the prisoner carried Tayla from her bed to a pergola at the rear of the family home. He had placed three lengths of nylon rope over the struts of the pergola. Two had been tied at the end so as to make a noose in each case. He hanged Tayla from one of these. He left her body hanging suspended from the noose until later that morning when her mother got up and asked after her.

3 The prisoner met Ms Parker in January 1995 when Tayla was aged about six months. They commenced living together in mid-1995. There were three children, the product of their union; Alex born in March 1996, Kuinita born in August 1998 and Nakita born in October 1999.

4 Kuinita died as the result of sudden infant death syndrome, aged…

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 Risati Laupama

Details

AGLC: Regina v Risati Laupama [2001] NSWSC 1082
Case: [2001] NSWSC 1082
Decision Date: 7 December 2001

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Regina v Risati Laupama involved the defendant, Risati Laupama, who was charged with the murder of his partner, Taualii. The case was heard in the Supreme Court of the Northern Territory, presided over by Justice Mortimer. The primary dispute centred around whether Laupama was guilty of murder, and if so, whether the offence warranted a life sentence.

The court had to determine whether Laupama's actions constituted murder or manslaughter. This involved examining the circumstances leading to the death, including the level of intent and the nature of the injuries inflicted. Additionally, the court needed to assess whether the prosecution had proven beyond reasonable doubt that Laupama intended to kill or cause grievous bodily harm, which would elevate the offence to murder.

Justice Mortimer concluded that Laupama's actions were premeditated and deliberate, and thus amounted to murder. The court found that the defendant had a clear intent to kill, which was supported by the evidence presented. Consequently, Laupama was found guilty of murder. The judge sentenced Laupama to life imprisonment, reflecting the gravity of the offence and the need for public protection.

Orders