Citation: R v Hunt [2014] NSWSC 1919
Court: Supreme Court of New South Wales
Date: 24 September 2014
Judge(s): Button J
Background
In the early hours of 20 July 2013, following a party at a home in Gilgandra, the offender's partner stabbed a man to death outside the premises. The offender witnessed the fatal attack and immediately understood that the injuries were fatal. Rather than seek help or contact police, she re-entered the home and washed the murder weapon, scrubbing blood from the knife her partner had just used to kill the deceased.
The offender and her partner then agreed to tell police a false account: that both had been asleep in bed at the time of the killing. When police arrived around 7 AM, she repeated that lie, and later confirmed it in a signed written statement. Shortly afterward, she retracted the statement, and by 10:30 AM had made a second statement that was closer to the truth, though it still omitted any mention of the knife or her cleaning of it.
The offender was charged with being an accessory after the fact to murder. She was nineteen years old at the time of the offence. She pleaded guilty in the Local Court before committal, had effectively no prior criminal history, and subsequently participated in an induced interview and signed an undertaking to give evidence against her partner.
Legal Issues
- What was the appropriate sentence for the offence of accessory after the fact to murder, having regard to both the objective seriousness of the specific conduct and the offender's subjective circumstances?
- What discount should be applied for the early guilty plea?
- What discount should be applied for past and future assistance to authorities?
- Whether special circumstances existed justifying a reduction in the ratio between the head sentence and the non-parole period?
- Which aspects of the offender's conduct properly formed the particulars of the criminal offence, and which did not?
Decision
Button J found that, while the offence of accessory after the fact to murder is objectively very serious, this particular instance fell at the lower end of the spectrum of objective criminality. The murder itself was unplanned and spontaneous. The offender had no forewarning of the killing, and her subsequent conduct, including washing the knife and agreeing to a false alibi, was panicked rather than calculated. The lies told to police were also, ultimately, futile, because a number of other witnesses had seen the stabbing.
On the question of which conduct formed the particulars of the offence, Button J was not satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the second statement to police (which omitted any reference to the knife but described the assault) was motivated by an intention to assist the principal to evade justice. There was a reasonable possibility that the omission was directed at concealing the offender's own conduct in washing the knife, rather than at shielding the principal from a murder charge. That conduct was therefore not treated as an explicit foundation of the criminal liability.
The offender's subjective circumstances were described as compelling. She was nineteen at the time of the offence, had effectively no prior criminal history, had pleaded guilty at the earliest opportunity, and had experienced severe deprivation in childhood. She had also offered to give evidence against her partner, which Button J assessed as constituting genuine assistance to authorities. A discount of 25% was applied for the early guilty plea, and a further discount was applied for past and anticipated future assistance under s 23 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW).
Button J found that special circumstances existed warranting a significant reduction in the ratio between the non-parole period and the head sentence. Given the offender's background and personal circumstances, an extended period of supervised parole was considered necessary to support her reintegration after release.
Orders Made
- The offender was convicted of being an accessory after the fact to murder.
- Head sentence: 2 years and 8 months imprisonment.
- Non-parole period: 1 year and 4 months, dated from 20 July 2013.
- Parole period: 1 year and 4 months, expiring 19 March 2016.
- The offender was to be released on parole on 19 November 2014.
Key Takeaways
- An accessory after the fact to murder carries a maximum penalty of 25 years imprisonment under New South Wales law, reflecting the very high moral culpability Parliament attaches to knowingly assisting a murderer to evade justice.
- Not all false or incomplete statements made to police following a murder will necessarily form particulars of the accessory offence; where there is a reasonable possibility that a lie was directed at concealing the offender's own separate conduct rather than shielding the principal, that conduct may not be established as part of the accessory charge beyond reasonable doubt.
- A guilty plea entered in the Local Court before committal attracted a 25% sentencing discount in these proceedings.
- Powerful subjective circumstances, including youth, absence of prior criminal history, severe childhood deprivation, and cooperation with authorities, can significantly reduce the sentence imposed even for a very serious offence; Button J referenced both Bugmy v The Queen and Munda v Western Australia on the relevance of background deprivation.
- Special circumstances justifying a non-parole period that is proportionally shorter than the standard ratio may be established where an offender's personal history and rehabilitation needs require an extended period of supervised parole following release.
Legislation and Cases Referenced
Legislation
- Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW), ss 21A, 23
Cases
- Bugmy v The Queen [2013] HCA 37; 249 CLR 571
- LB v R [2013] NSWCCA 70
- Munda v Western Australia [2013] HCA 38; 249 CLR 600