Siale v R [2019] NSWCCA 80

Siale v R [2019] NSWCCA 80

It was open to the jury to be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the applicant intended to inflict grievous bodily harm. The experts did not state that he lacked capacity to form that intent, and the jury could rely on evidence that he knew where he was, spoke coherently, deliberately broke the bottle to make it a weapon, moved around the deceased's mother to reach the deceased, struck a vulnerable part of the body, struck again after the deceased was already wounded, and left the scene walking normally.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 April 2019
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal Against Conviction for Murder / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Conviction; Sentence Appeal Contingent Upon Conviction Appeal Being Allowed and Manslaughter Verdict Substituted
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['murder' 'intention to Inflict Grievous Bodily Harm' 'intoxication' 'specific Intent' 'unreasonable Verdict']
['criminal Law' 'criminal Appeals'] ['murder' 'intention to Inflict Grievous Bodily Harm' 'intoxication' 'specific Intent' 'unreasonable Verdict']

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 Appeal Against Conviction for Murder / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Conviction; Sentence Appeal Contingent Upon Conviction Appeal Being Allowed and Manslaughter Verdict Substituted

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether it was open to the jury to be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the applicant had the requisite intent to be guilty of murder.' "Whether the applicant's intoxication precluded proof beyond reasonable doubt of an intention to inflict grievous bodily harm."]

Ratio Decidendi

It was open to the jury to be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the applicant intended to inflict grievous bodily harm. The experts did not state that he lacked capacity to form that intent, and the jury could rely on evidence that he knew where he was, spoke coherently, deliberately broke the bottle to make it a weapon, moved around the deceased's mother to reach the deceased, struck a vulnerable part of the body, struck again after the deceased was already wounded, and left the scene walking normally.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Grant the applicant leave to appeal.' 'Appeal dismissed.']