R v Le [2019] NSWSC 483

R v Le [2019] NSWSC 483

The circumstantial evidence, including shoe prints matched to accused's shoes, DNA on the deceased's shoe, mobile phone location data, witness descriptions, and absence of reasonable alternative hypothesis that Mr Shen was present and inflicted the fatal wounds, led to finding that the accused committed a voluntary act with intention to kill or inflict grievous bodily harm causing the death of the deceased, but due to his schizoaffective disorder and substantial impairment by abnormality of mind, liability for murder is reduced to manslaughter. In respect of count 2, the evidence showed the accused committed armed robbery as charged.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
30 April 2019
Procedural Posture
Special Hearing (criminal) / Verdict
Outcome
Count 1: Not guilty of murder; on the limited evidence available, committed manslaughter as an alternative offence. Count 2: On the limited evidence available, committed the offence of armed robbery with offensive weapon as charged.
Legal Topics
['manslaughter' 'murder' 'armed Robbery' 'substantial Impairment by Abnormality of Mind' 'schizoaffective Disorder' 'circumstantial Evidence']
['criminal Law' 'mental Health Law'] ['manslaughter' 'murder' 'armed Robbery' 'substantial Impairment by Abnormality of Mind' 'schizoaffective Disorder' 'circumstantial Evidence']

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

Special Hearing (criminal) / Verdict

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Was the accused, Mr Ze Ren Le, the person who inflicted fatal wounds upon Xun Ke?' 'Has the Crown proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused committed murder as charged?' 'Has the Crown proved armed robbery with offensive weapon as charged?' 'Is the partial defence of substantial impairment under s 23A Crimes Act 1990 (NSW) available to the accused so as to reduce murder to manslaughter?']

Ratio Decidendi

The circumstantial evidence, including shoe prints matched to accused's shoes, DNA on the deceased's shoe, mobile phone location data, witness descriptions, and absence of reasonable alternative hypothesis that Mr Shen was present and inflicted the fatal wounds, led to finding that the accused committed a voluntary act with intention to kill or inflict grievous bodily harm causing the death of the deceased, but due to his schizoaffective disorder and substantial impairment by abnormality of mind, liability for murder is reduced to manslaughter. In respect of count 2, the evidence showed the accused committed armed robbery as charged.

Court Disposition

Count 1: Not guilty of murder; on the limited evidence available, committed manslaughter as an alternative offence. Count 2: On the limited evidence available, committed the offence of armed robbery with offensive weapon as charged.

Orders

  • ['Verdict in relation to count 1: accused not guilty of murder but, on limited evidence, committed offence of manslaughter as alternative to murder charged.' 'Verdict in relation to count 2: on limited evidence available, accused committed offence of robbery armed with offensive weapon charged.']