Citation: Regina v Blanks [2016] NSWSC 361
Court: Supreme Court of New South Wales
Date: 1 April 2016
Judge(s): Hall J
Background
The accused was charged with the murder of her partner, who died on 15 January 2012 at Wondabyne, a remote area within the Brisbane Waters National Park accessible only by boat, train, or walking track. The couple had been in a relationship for approximately six months and had been living in a tent at a campsite near the local railway station in the weeks leading up to the death. The deceased bled to death from a stab wound that severed the femoral artery and vein in his upper left thigh.
Because the accused had previously been found unfit to be tried, the proceedings were conducted as a special hearing under the Mental Health (Forensic Provisions) Act 1990. Under that framework, the accused is taken to have pleaded not guilty, and the Crown must still prove the offence beyond reasonable doubt on the limited evidence available before any finding adverse to the accused can be made.
The accused's account to police was that the deceased tripped and fell onto a log where she had rested a knife facing upwards. The Crown's case was that the accused, who was seated and cutting vegetables, lashed out with the knife in an upward motion during an argument, stabbing the deceased in the thigh.
Legal Issues
- Whether the Crown proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused committed murder, specifically whether the fatal stabbing was carried out with intent to kill or cause grievous bodily harm.
- Whether, in the alternative, the Crown established unlawful and dangerous act manslaughter beyond reasonable doubt.
- Whether the accused's account of an accidental stabbing (the deceased falling onto a stationary knife) was consistent with the forensic and expert evidence.
- How the accused's unfitness to be tried, and evidence of self-induced intoxication, affected the analysis.
Decision
Hall J was not satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the accused acted with the requisite intent for murder, namely an intention to kill or to cause grievous bodily harm. The court found that the Crown case involved an accused who was using a knife for an ordinary domestic purpose at the time of the stabbing, and there was no evidence she had chased or confronted the deceased with criminal intent. That context distinguished this case from those where murderous intent could more readily be inferred from the use of a knife.
The court rejected the accused's account that the death resulted from the deceased accidentally falling onto a stationary knife. The forensic pathology evidence, including the findings as to wound depth and wound trajectory, together with the absence of physical injuries consistent with a fall, was irreconcilable with the accidental explanation. Expert evidence needed to identify the basis and reasoning upon which any opinion supporting accidental death could be sustained, and the evidence here could not support that conclusion.
On the alternative count of unlawful and dangerous act manslaughter, Hall J was satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the accused stabbed the deceased and that the act was both unlawful and dangerous. An act is dangerous for these purposes if a reasonable person would have appreciated it exposed others to a risk of serious injury, regardless of whether the accused herself recognised the danger. The court was also satisfied that self-induced intoxication was present but, by operation of section 428E(1)(a) of the Crimes Act 1900, this could not be taken into account when assessing the mental element required for manslaughter.
Witness evidence from two fishermen at the scene corroborated the Crown's account of a volatile argument between the accused and the deceased on the afternoon in question. The court also had regard to relationship evidence and the accused's lies in assessing the overall circumstantial case.
Orders Made
- Murder: Not guilty.
- Unlawful and dangerous act manslaughter: On the limited evidence available, the accused committed the offence.
Key Takeaways
- A special hearing under the Mental Health (Forensic Provisions) Act 1990 requires the Crown to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, even where the accused is unfit to be tried; the accused is taken to have pleaded not guilty and retains the presumption of innocence.
- Under the unlawful and dangerous act manslaughter standard, it is not necessary that the accused appreciated the dangerousness of the act, provided a reasonable person in the circumstances would have recognised an appreciable risk of serious injury to others.
- Expert forensic pathology evidence must identify the basis and reasoning capable of supporting any conclusion as to accidental death; where wound depth, wound trajectory, and the absence of injuries consistent with a fall cannot be reconciled with the accidental explanation, that explanation will be rejected.
- The use of a knife during what began as an ordinary domestic activity does not automatically give rise to an inference of intent to kill or cause grievous bodily harm, and murder requires proof of that specific mental element beyond reasonable doubt.
- Self-induced intoxication is excluded by section 428E(1)(a) of the Crimes Act 1900 from consideration when determining the mental element required for manslaughter.
Legislation and Cases Referenced
Legislation
- Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), including s 428E(1)(a)
- Evidence Act 1995 (NSW)
- Mental Health (Forensic Provisions) Act 1990 (NSW), ss 16, 19, 21, 21A, 21B, 22
Cases
- Edwards v R (1993) 178 CLR 193
- Qualtieri v The Queen [2006] NSWCCA 95
- R v Esposito (1998) 45 NSWLR 442
- R v Hillier (2007) 225 CLR 618
- R v Rowe [2002] NSWCCA 455
- R v Serratore (1999) 48 NSWLR 101
- R v Wilson (1992) 174 CLR 313
- Shepherd v The Queen (1990) 170 CLR 573