R v Siemek (No. 2) [2021] NSWSC 1293

R v Siemek (No. 2) [2021] NSWSC 1293

In a case where a special verdict of act proven but not criminally responsible is returned due to mental health impairment, and the accused has a substantial history of mental illness and non-compliance, the only appropriate order under s.33(1) is for detention as a forensic patient until released by due process of law, accompanied by referral to the Mental Health Review Tribunal, taking into account the need to protect the community and the welfare of the accused.

Parties
Prosecution: Regina (Crown); Accused: Justin Karl Siemek
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 October 2021
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Post Verdict Orders Following Judge Alone Trial, Special Verdict
Outcome
The accused is ordered to be detained in a correctional facility or other place determined by the Mental Health Review Tribunal until released by due process of law and referred to the Tribunal. Administrative notifications and document provision ordered.
Legal Topics
Special Verdict of Act Proven But Not Criminally Responsible, Orders Under Mental Health and Cognitive Impairment Forensic Provisions Act 2020, Victim Impact Statements, Detention of Forensic Patients
Criminal Law Mental Health Law Special Verdict of Act Proven But Not Criminally Responsible Orders Under Mental Health and Cognitive Impairment Forensic Provisions Act 2020 Victim Impact Statements Detention of Forensic Patients

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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina (Crown)

Prosecution

Justin Karl Siemek

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Post Verdict Orders Following Judge Alone Trial, Special Verdict

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What orders should be made following a special verdict of act proven but not criminally responsible due to mental health impairment?
  2. 2 What is the effect and role of a victim impact statement in these circumstances?

Ratio Decidendi

In a case where a special verdict of act proven but not criminally responsible is returned due to mental health impairment, and the accused has a substantial history of mental illness and non-compliance, the only appropriate order under s.33(1) is for detention as a forensic patient until released by due process of law, accompanied by referral to the Mental Health Review Tribunal, taking into account the need to protect the community and the welfare of the accused.

Court Disposition

The accused is ordered to be detained in a correctional facility or other place determined by the Mental Health Review Tribunal until released by due process of law and referred to the Tribunal. Administrative notifications and document provision ordered.

Orders

  • Justin Karl Siemek to be detained in a correctional facility, or such place as determined by the Mental Health Review Tribunal, until released by due process of law (s.33(1)(b) MHCIFP Act).
  • Referral of Justin Karl Siemek to the Mental Health Review Tribunal (s.34 MHCIFP Act).