R v Styman; R v Taber [2004] NSWCCA 245

R v Styman; R v Taber [2004] NSWCCA 245

The Court held that while the evidence supported the conviction for aggravated robbery, it was not open to the jury to conclude beyond reasonable doubt that, at any time before Mrs Alchin died, the appellants fully realised she would probably die unless rescued, and thus the convictions for murder should be quashed. There was insufficient evidence that the appellants possessed the requisite mental element of reckless indifference to human life after the 000 call failed. New trials on manslaughter are ordered, and the sentences for aggravated breaking and entering are to be set aside and proceedings remitted for resentencing.

Parties
Appellant: Ian Craig Styman; Appellant: Peter David Taber; Respondent: Crown
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
10 September 2004
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Court of Criminal Appeal Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Appeals allowed in part; convictions for murder quashed; new trial for manslaughter; sentences for aggravated breaking and entering set aside; matter remitted for resentencing.
Legal Topics
Murder, Manslaughter, Reckless Indifference, Omission, Causation, Joint Criminal Enterprise, Jury Directions, Aggravated Breaking and Entering, Aggravated Robbery, Criminal Appeal Act 1912
Criminal Law Murder Manslaughter Reckless Indifference Omission Causation Joint Criminal Enterprise Jury Directions +3 more

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 4 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ian Craig Styman

Appellant

Peter David Taber

Appellant

Crown

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Court of Criminal Appeal Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in failing to direct verdicts of acquittal on the murder charge
  2. 2 Whether the trial judge failed to direct the jury properly on murder, manslaughter, causation and joint enterprise
  3. 3 Whether the jury verdicts of murder were unreasonable based on the evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that while the evidence supported the conviction for aggravated robbery, it was not open to the jury to conclude beyond reasonable doubt that, at any time before Mrs Alchin died, the appellants fully realised she would probably die unless rescued, and thus the convictions for murder should be quashed. There was insufficient evidence that the appellants possessed the requisite mental element of reckless indifference to human life after the 000 call failed. New trials on manslaughter are ordered, and the sentences for aggravated breaking and entering are to be set aside and proceedings remitted for resentencing.

Court Disposition

Appeals allowed in part; convictions for murder quashed; new trial for manslaughter; sentences for aggravated breaking and entering set aside; matter remitted for resentencing.

Orders

  • Appeals allowed in part
  • In the case of each appellant, quash the verdict of guilty of murder