R v Wilson (No 4) [2017] NSWSC 1730

R v Wilson (No 4) [2017] NSWSC 1730

On the limited evidence available, the Crown proved that Ms Wilson's acts caused Mr Shepstone's death and that, when she burnt him with boiling water, she intended to cause really serious injury. However, the Crown did not prove beyond reasonable doubt that she did not believe her actions were necessary to defend herself, given the history of violence and her significant impairments. The Crown did prove beyond reasonable doubt that pouring further near-boiling water on Mr Shepstone after he was on the ground was not a reasonable response in the circumstances as she perceived them, but was excessive. The resulting verdict was not guilty of murder but guilty of manslaughter.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 December 2017
Procedural Posture
Criminal Prosecution for Murder With Manslaughter Available as an Alternative; Special Hearing Under the Mental Health (forensic Provisions) Act 1990 (nsw) / Judge Alone Special Hearing Verdict After Accused Found Unfit to Be Tried
Outcome
On the limited evidence available, Ms Wilson is not guilty of murder, but guilty of manslaughter.
Legal Topics
['murder' 'manslaughter' 'special Hearing' 'unfitness to Be Tried' 'self Defence' 'provocation' 'substantial Impairment by Abnormality of Mind' 'mental Illness Defence' 'domestic Violence' 'causation']
['criminal Law' 'mental Health and Forensic Provisions'] ['murder' 'manslaughter' 'special Hearing' 'unfitness to Be Tried' 'self Defence' 'provocation' 'substantial Impairment by Abnormality of Mind' 'mental Illness Defence' 'domestic Violence' 'causation']

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 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Criminal Prosecution for Murder With Manslaughter Available as an Alternative; Special Hearing Under the Mental Health (forensic Provisions) Act 1990 (nsw) / Judge Alone Special Hearing Verdict After Accused Found Unfit to Be Tried

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether, on the limited evidence available, the Crown proved beyond reasonable doubt that Ms Wilson murdered Jason Shepstone.' 'Whether Ms Wilson intended to cause Mr Shepstone really serious injury when she hit him with a metal pole.' "How Mr Shepstone's burns were caused and whether he was struck before he was burnt by boiling water." 'Whether the Crown proved beyond reasonable doubt that Ms Wilson was not acting in self-defence.' 'Whether the Crown proved beyond reasonable doubt that Ms Wilson was not acting under provocation.' 'Whether the partial defence of substantial impairment by abnormality of mind under s 23A of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) would reduce murder to manslaughter.' 'Whether a verdict of not guilty on the ground of mental illness was available.']

Ratio Decidendi

On the limited evidence available, the Crown proved that Ms Wilson's acts caused Mr Shepstone's death and that, when she burnt him with boiling water, she intended to cause really serious injury. However, the Crown did not prove beyond reasonable doubt that she did not believe her actions were necessary to defend herself, given the history of violence and her significant impairments. The Crown did prove beyond reasonable doubt that pouring further near-boiling water on Mr Shepstone after he was on the ground was not a reasonable response in the circumstances as she perceived them, but was excessive. The resulting verdict was not guilty of murder but guilty of manslaughter.

Court Disposition

On the limited evidence available, Ms Wilson is not guilty of murder, but guilty of manslaughter.

Orders

  • ['A verdict be entered that on the limited evidence available, Ms Wilson is not guilty of murder, but guilty of manslaughter.']