R v Fadel [2024] NSWSC 266

Procedural Posture

Criminal Judge Alone Trial on Indictment for Causing Grievous Bodily Harm With Intent to Murder, Alternative Wounding With Intent to Cause Grievous Bodily Harm, and Murder / Verdict After Trial; Determination of Defence of Mental Health Impairment and Alternative Partial Defence of Substantial Impairment

Legal Issues

1. 1 ['Whether the Crown proved beyond reasonable doubt the physical acts alleged in counts 1 and 3 of the indictment' 'Whether the accused established on the balance of probabilities that, at the time of the acts, he had a mental health impairment within s 4 of the Mental Health Cognitive Impairment Forensic Provisions Act 2020 (NSW)' 'Whether that mental health impairment meant the accused did not know the nature and quality of the acts or did not know that the acts were wrong within s 28 of the Mental Health Cognitive Impairment Forensic Provisions Act 2020 (NSW)' 'Whether evidence of drug use, possible drug-induced psychosis, malingering, and prison telephone calls displaced the availability of the s 28 defence' 'Whether it was necessary to consider the alternative partial defence of substantial impairment under s 23A of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW)']

Ratio Decidendi

The Court found that the accused carried out the acts in counts 1 and 3, but the defence of mental health impairment was established on the balance of probabilities. Independent evidence of pre-existing illness, the irrationality of the attacks on friends, the accused's presentation on arrest and in custody, and the unanimous expert opinions of Dr Eagle and Dr Allnutt supported the conclusion that he was suffering from schizophrenia or a schizo-affective disorder, being a mental health impairment under s 4 of the MHCIFP Act. That impairment meant he did not know his acts were wrong because he could not reason with a moderate degree of sense and composure about whether his acts, as...

Court Disposition

Special verdict returned on counts 1 and 3: act proven but accused not criminally responsible pursuant to s 28 of the Mental Health Cognitive Impairment Forensic Provisions Act 2020 (NSW).

Orders

• ['On count 1, the Court finds the offence proven but the accused not criminally responsible for it.' 'On count 3, the Court finds the offence proven but the accused not criminally responsible for it.' 'The verdicts entered against counts 1 and 3 of the indictment presented on 4 March 2024 are "act proven but not...