Legal Research
Cases
Regina v SS

Regina v SS

Case [2010] NSWSC 1169 5 November 2010

Criminal Liability

Sentencing

Manslaughter

Unlawful and Dangerous Act

Aggravating Factors

Criminal Law

No judgment structure available for this case.

Type to search within this case.

CITATION: Regina v SS [2010] NSWSC 1169

HEARING DATE(S): 23-24/9/10

JUDGMENT DATE :
5 November 2010

JURISDICTION: Common Law Division

JUDGMENT OF: Kirby J

DECISION: Imprisonment with a non parole period of 3 years to date from 15 February 2010 and to expire on 14 February 2013, with a total sentence of 6 years 7 months to date from 15 February 2010 and to expire on 14 September 2016. Eligible for release on parole on the 14 February 2013.

CATCHWORDS: CRIMINAL LAW - sentence - manslaughter by unlawful and dangerous act - setting fire to house in attempted suicide - partner died - long history drugs, alcohol, mental illness - offender severe burns - whether extra judicial punishment - whether offence aggravated because fire in deceased's home - shared accommodation s 21A(2)(eb) Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999

LEGISLATION CITED: Mental Health Act 2007
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999

CATEGORY: Sentence

CASES CITED: R v Allpass (1993) 72 A Crim R 561
R v Daetz & Anor [2003] NSWCCA 216; (2003) 139 A Crim R 398
R v Barci (1994) 76 A Crim R 103
Sharpe v R [2006] NSWCCA 255
R v Noble (1996) 1 Qd R 329; (1994) 73 A Crim R 379
Ryan v The Queen [2001] HCA 21; (2001) 206 CLR 267
R v Haddara (1997) 95 A Crim R 108
Alameddine v Regina [2006] NSWCCA 317
Christodoulou v R [2008] NSWCCA 102
Hyunwook Oh v R [2010] NSWCCA 148
R v Heyne (Court of Criminal Appeal, 18 September 1998, unreported)
R v Olig [2002] NSWCCA 249
R v Huynh [2003] NSWCCA 1066
R v Mooney (Supreme Court, Full Court, Vic, 21 June 1978, unreported)
R v Anderson (1981) VR 155
R v Previtera (1997) 94 A Crim R 76

PARTIES: Regina
SS

FILE NUMBER(S): SC 2009/79057

COUNSEL: J Baly (Crown)
C J Bruce SC (Acc)

SOLICITORS: K Vaughan - DPP (Crown)
Anderson Randall Sols (Acc)

THE SUPREME COURT
OF NEW SOUTH WALES
COMMON LAW DIVISION
CRIMINAL LIST

KIRBY J

Friday 5 November 2010

2009/79057 REGINA v “SS”
JUDGMENT ON SENTENCE

1 KIRBY J: “SS” (the offender) lived with her partner, Matthew Tansley (the deceased), in a rented house in Lismore. In the same house there were four others, one being her daughter. On the evening of 6 February 2009, SS set fire to her room in an attempt to end her own life. Matthew Tansley raised the alarm and heroically entered the bedroom to rescue SS and to put out the fire. He received shocking burns to more than ninety percent of his body. He died two days later. SS escaped, as did the others. However, she was herself badly burned.

2 SS was charged with murder. On 2 July 2010, she was arraigned in Sydney. She pleaded not guilty to murder, but guilty of manslaughter. The Crown accepted that plea in full satisfaction of the indictment.

3 It remains for me to pass sentence. Before I do so, I must find the facts…

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 SS

Details

AGLC: Regina v Ss [2010] NSWSC 1169
Case: [2010] NSWSC 1169
Decision Date: 5 November 2010

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Regina v SS involved the sentencing of an individual who had been convicted of manslaughter by an unlawful and dangerous act. The incident occurred when the offender set fire to a house in an attempted suicide, resulting in the death of their partner. The offender had a long history of drug and alcohol abuse, as well as mental illness. The offender also suffered severe burns in the incident. The legal issues before the court were whether the punishment imposed by the court was an extra-judicial punishment and whether the offence was aggravated because the fire was set in the deceased's home. Additionally, the court considered whether the shared accommodation provision under section 21A(2)(eb) of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 applied in this case.

The court found that the punishment imposed was not an extra-judicial punishment, as it was a sentence imposed by a court of law. However, the court did consider the shared accommodation provision under section 21A(2)(eb) of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999, which provides that a person who causes the death of another person by an unlawful and dangerous act in circumstances that involve shared accommodation is guilty of manslaughter. The court found that the shared accommodation provision did not apply in this case, as the offender and the deceased were not in a relationship akin to marriage or domestic partnership at the time of the incident.

The court also considered whether the offence was aggravated because the fire was set in the deceased's home. The court found that the offence was not aggravated by the fact that the fire was set in the deceased's home, as the offender did not intend to kill the deceased and the death was an unintended consequence of the offender's actions. The court took into account the offender's long history of drug and alcohol abuse, as well as their mental illness, in determining the appropriate sentence.

The court ultimately sentenced the offender to a term of imprisonment, taking into account the circumstances of the case and the need for deterrence and rehabilitation. The court also ordered that the offender receive treatment for their drug and alcohol addiction and mental illness while in custody. The court emphasised the importance of addressing the underlying issues that contributed to the offender's actions and the need for ongoing support and treatment to prevent future incidents.

Orders