REGINA v HAM [2009] NSWSC 296

REGINA v HAM [2009] NSWSC 296

The accused deliberately caused Rebecca Baillie's death by stabbing her and knew the nature and quality of his acts, but he proved on the balance of probabilities that, because of longstanding schizophrenia and delusional beliefs that had expanded to include the deceased in a conspiracy to sexually assault him, he did not know that what he was doing was wrong. The effects of that delusional belief, apart from amphetamine effects, were sufficient to deprive him of the capacity to reason with a moderate degree of sense and composure about the legal and moral wrongness of the killing, so a special verdict of not guilty by reason of mental illness was required.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
04 August 2009
Procedural Posture
Criminal Prosecution for Murder / Judge Alone Trial After Jury Discharge and Election Under S.132(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act 1986; Special Verdict
Outcome
Not guilty by reason of mental illness.
Legal Topics
['murder' 'judge Alone Trial' 'mental Illness Defence' 'substantial Impairment by Abnormality of Mind' 'schizophrenia' 'drug Induced Intoxication' 'special Verdict' 'forensic Patient Detention']
['criminal Law' 'mental Health Law'] ['murder' 'judge Alone Trial' 'mental Illness Defence' 'substantial Impairment by Abnormality of Mind' 'schizophrenia' 'drug Induced Intoxication' 'special Verdict' 'forensic Patient Detention']

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 / Judge Alone Trial After Jury Discharge and Election Under S.132(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act 1986; Special Verdict

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the Crown proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused caused Rebecca Baillie's death by stabbing her with intent to kill or cause grievous bodily harm." 'Whether the accused proved on the balance of probabilities that, at the time of the killing, he was not responsible in law by reason of mental illness.' 'Whether the accused knew the nature and quality of his acts or knew that what he was doing was wrong according to ordinary standards.' 'Whether, if the mental illness defence failed, the partial defence of substantial impairment by abnormality of mind under s.23A of the Crimes Act 1900 was available.' "What effect the accused's methylamphetamine use had on the availability of the mental illness and substantial impairment defences."]

Ratio Decidendi

The accused deliberately caused Rebecca Baillie's death by stabbing her and knew the nature and quality of his acts, but he proved on the balance of probabilities that, because of longstanding schizophrenia and delusional beliefs that had expanded to include the deceased in a conspiracy to sexually assault him, he did not know that what he was doing was wrong. The effects of that delusional belief, apart from amphetamine effects, were sufficient to deprive him of the capacity to reason with a moderate degree of sense and composure about the legal and moral wrongness of the killing, so a special verdict of not guilty by reason of mental illness was required.

Court Disposition

Not guilty by reason of mental illness.

Orders

  • ['Tyron Jarrad Ham upon the charge that between 10 and 14 September 2007 at Stockton in the State of New South Wales you did murder Rebecca Baillie I find that you are not guilty by reason of mental illness.' 'I order that the accused be detained, pursuant to s.39 of the Mental Health (Forensic Provisions) Act 1990,...