R v Porter [1933] HCA 1

R v Porter [1933] HCA 1

A defendant is not criminally responsible for murder if, at the relevant time, their mind was so disordered by disease or disturbance that they could not know the act was wrong according to the everyday standards of reasonable people.

Parties
Prosecutor: The King; Prisoner/defendant: Bertram Edward Porter
Jurisdiction
Australia
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Trial on Indictment
Outcome
Not guilty on the ground of insanity at the time of commission of the act charged.
Legal Topics
Insanity, Murder, Criminal Responsibility
Criminal Law Insanity Murder Criminal Responsibility

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The King

Prosecutor

Bertram Edward Porter

Prisoner/defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Trial on Indictment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the accused was criminally responsible for the murder due to insanity at the time of the act

Ratio Decidendi

A defendant is not criminally responsible for murder if, at the relevant time, their mind was so disordered by disease or disturbance that they could not know the act was wrong according to the everyday standards of reasonable people.

Court Disposition

Not guilty on the ground of insanity at the time of commission of the act charged.