R v Kapesz [2020] NSWDC 92

R v Kapesz [2020] NSWDC 92

The uncontested evidence established that Troy Kapesz performed the acts alleged in Counts 1, 2 and 4. The unanimous psychiatric evidence showed that, at the time of each offence, he suffered schizophrenia amounting to a disease of the mind and was labouring under a defect of reason caused by delusional beliefs and command hallucinations. On the balance of probabilities the defence of mental illness was made out, so he was not criminally responsible and was found not guilty of Counts 1, 2 and 4 by reason of mental illness. Given the medical evidence, detention under s 39 was appropriate.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
08 April 2020
Procedural Posture
Criminal Special Hearing / Special Hearing Following Finding of Unfitness for Trial; Determination of Defence of Mental Illness and Orders Under S 39 of the Mental Health (forensic Provisions) Act 1990
Outcome
Troy Kapesz was found not guilty of Counts 1, 2 and 4 by reason of mental illness; the alternative Count 3 was not considered; he was ordered to be detained until released by due process of law.
Legal Topics
['not Guilty by Reason of Mental Illness' 'special Hearing' 'fitness for Trial' 'wounding With Intent to Cause Grievous Bodily Harm' 'reckless Wounding' 'forensic Patient Detention']
['criminal Law' 'mental Health Law'] ['not Guilty by Reason of Mental Illness' 'special Hearing' 'fitness for Trial' 'wounding With Intent to Cause Grievous Bodily Harm' 'reckless Wounding' '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 Special Hearing / Special Hearing Following Finding of Unfitness for Trial; Determination of Defence of Mental Illness and Orders Under S 39 of the Mental Health (forensic Provisions) Act 1990

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the accused committed the acts alleged in Counts 1, 2 and 4.' 'Whether the accused had a defence of mental illness available at the time of the offences.' 'Whether the accused should be found not guilty by reason of mental illness.' 'What order should be made under s 39 of the Mental Health (Forensic Provisions) Act 1990 following the special verdict.']

Ratio Decidendi

The uncontested evidence established that Troy Kapesz performed the acts alleged in Counts 1, 2 and 4. The unanimous psychiatric evidence showed that, at the time of each offence, he suffered schizophrenia amounting to a disease of the mind and was labouring under a defect of reason caused by delusional beliefs and command hallucinations. On the balance of probabilities the defence of mental illness was made out, so he was not criminally responsible and was found not guilty of Counts 1, 2 and 4 by reason of mental illness. Given the medical evidence, detention under s 39 was appropriate.

Court Disposition

Troy Kapesz was found not guilty of Counts 1, 2 and 4 by reason of mental illness; the alternative Count 3 was not considered; he was ordered to be detained until released by due process of law.

Orders

  • ['I find Troy Kapesz not guilty of Count 1, that on 5 June 2018, at Brookvale in the State of New South Wales he wounded Duane Amohanga with intent to cause grievous bodily harm to Duane Amohanga pursuant to s 33(1)(a) of the Crimes Act 1900 by reason of mental illness.' 'I find Troy Kapesz not guilty of Count 2 on...