R v BB [2022] NSWSC 1698

R v BB [2022] NSWSC 1698

The requirements of s 31 were met because the prosecutor and the accused agreed that the proposed evidence established the defence, the accused was legally represented, and the Court was satisfied on the evidence that the accused had a mental health impairment. The Court was satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the accused committed the physical acts required to prove murder, and on the balance of probabilities that, although she likely knew the nature and quality of her act, because of her mental health impairment she did not know the act was wrong. A special verdict of act proven but not criminally responsible was therefore returned.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 December 2022
Procedural Posture
Criminal Proceedings for Murder / Application for Special Verdict Under S 31 of the Mental Health Cognitive Impairment Forensic Provisions Act 2020 (nsw) Before Trial Without a Jury
Outcome
Special verdict of act proven but not criminally responsible returned for the offence of murder charged by the indictment dated 1 August 2022.
Legal Topics
['murder' 'defence of Mental Health Impairment' 'special Verdict of Act Proven But Not Criminally Responsible' 'post Natal Depression' 'bipolar Disorder']
['criminal Law' 'mental Health and Cognitive Impairment' 'evidence'] ['murder' 'defence of Mental Health Impairment' 'special Verdict of Act Proven But Not Criminally Responsible' 'post Natal Depression' 'bipolar Disorder']

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 Proceedings for Murder / Application for Special Verdict Under S 31 of the Mental Health Cognitive Impairment Forensic Provisions Act 2020 (nsw) Before Trial Without a Jury

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Court could enter a special verdict of act proven but not criminally responsible under s 31 of the Mental Health Cognitive Impairment Forensic Provisions Act 2020 (NSW) where the accused and prosecutor agreed that the evidence established a defence of mental health impairment.' 'Whether the accused had a mental health impairment as defined by s 4 of the Mental Health Cognitive Impairment Forensic Provisions Act 2020 (NSW).' 'Whether, because of that mental health impairment, the accused did not know that the act was wrong within s 28 of the Mental Health Cognitive Impairment Forensic Provisions Act 2020 (NSW).' 'Whether reasons should be given despite an apparent tension between s 31 of the Mental Health Cognitive Impairment Forensic Provisions Act 2020 (NSW) and s 133 of the Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW).']

Ratio Decidendi

The requirements of s 31 were met because the prosecutor and the accused agreed that the proposed evidence established the defence, the accused was legally represented, and the Court was satisfied on the evidence that the accused had a mental health impairment. The Court was satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the accused committed the physical acts required to prove murder, and on the balance of probabilities that, although she likely knew the nature and quality of her act, because of her mental health impairment she did not know the act was wrong. A special verdict of act proven but not criminally responsible was therefore returned.

Court Disposition

Special verdict of act proven but not criminally responsible returned for the offence of murder charged by the indictment dated 1 August 2022.

Orders

  • ['With respect to the offence of murder charged against the accused by the indictment dated 1 August 2022 the Court returns the special verdict of act proven but not criminally responsible pursuant to Section 31 of the Mental Health Cognitive Impairment Forensic Provisions Act 2020 (NSW).']