AI-generated summaries. Not legal advice. Always verify against the official judgment on NSW Caselaw.
← All decisions
Supreme Court 1 November 2018

R v Woszatka

[2018] NSWSC 1664

Homicide
CRIMINAL LAW MURDER TRIAL BY JUDGE ALONE ALLEGED MURDER BY ACCUSED OF HIS MOTHER DEFENCE OF MENTAL ILLNESS LONG HISTORY OF MENTAL ILLNESS

Citation: R v Woszatka [2018] NSWSC 1664
Court: Supreme Court of New South Wales
Date: 1 November 2018
Judge: Wilson J

Background

The accused was charged with murdering his mother at her Avalon Beach home on 18 September 2017. He was arrested on the same morning and subsequently stood trial on an indictment for murder. He elected a judge-alone trial under s 132 of the Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW), with the Crown consenting to that course.

The accused had a lengthy and well-documented history of severe schizophrenia, with multiple involuntary psychiatric admissions dating from at least 2015. In the six months before the offence he had been without treatment. His illness had repeatedly generated paranoid delusions specifically directed at his mother, as well as auditory hallucinations, violent ideation, and profound thought disorder.

The accused entered a plea of not guilty by reason of mental illness. There was no dispute about the circumstances of the death or about the accused's serious mental illness at the relevant time. The central question was whether the mental illness defence was made out at law.

  • Whether the accused satisfied the legal test for the defence of mental illness, as formulated in The King v Porter (1933) 55 CLR 182 and rooted in the M'Naghten rules
  • Specifically, whether chronic and severe schizophrenia, left untreated for approximately six months, so impaired the accused's capacity to reason about the wrongfulness of his conduct that the defence was available
  • Whether the same special verdict should apply to a related charge of assault occasioning actual bodily harm dealt with under s 167 of the Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW)

Decision

Wilson J reviewed a substantial body of evidence, including psychiatric hospital records spanning several years, reports and oral evidence from two forensic psychiatrists (one called by the Crown, one by the defence), and lay evidence about the accused's behaviour and mental state. The expert evidence was unanimous. Both forensic psychiatrists concluded that the accused suffered from a severe and disabling form of schizophrenia that, at the time of the offence, was directing his actions through active delusions.

The legal test applied was that from The King v Porter: the accused must be shown, on the balance of probabilities, to have been so affected by a disease of the mind that he either did not appreciate the nature and quality of his acts, or did not know that those acts were wrong. Wilson J found that, while the accused may have understood the physical nature of what he was doing, his capacity to reason about and make moral judgements concerning the wrongfulness of his conduct was so severely impaired by schizophrenia as to deprive him of that capacity entirely.

Wilson J noted that, although the court as the tribunal of fact is not bound to accept expert evidence, rejection of such evidence requires a rational basis. No rational basis for rejecting the unanimous expert opinion existed on the facts of this case. The defence of mental illness was accordingly established on the balance of probabilities.

The same conclusion applied to the related charge of assault occasioning actual bodily harm, dealt with alongside the murder charge pursuant to s 167 of the Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW).

Orders Made

  • A special verdict of not guilty by reason of mental illness returned on the charge of murder (under s 38 of the Mental Health (Forensic Provisions) Act 1990 (NSW))
  • A special verdict of not guilty by reason of mental illness returned on the charge of assault occasioning actual bodily harm (under the same provision, dealt with pursuant to s 167(1A) of the Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW))
  • The accused ordered to be detained in a correctional facility, or such other place as determined by the Mental Health Review Tribunal, until released by due process of law (under s 39 of the Mental Health (Forensic Provisions) Act 1990 (NSW))
  • The Registrar directed to notify the Minister for Health and the Mental Health Review Tribunal of the verdicts and orders, and to provide the Tribunal with a copy of the reasons, orders, and specified trial exhibits

Key Takeaways

  • The mental illness defence requires proof, on the balance of probabilities, that a disease of the mind deprived the accused of the capacity to appreciate the wrongfulness of the conduct. An accused need not be shown to have been unaware of the physical nature of the act; impaired moral reasoning capacity alone is sufficient to satisfy the test under Porter.
  • Unanimous expert psychiatric evidence is not automatically binding on the court as tribunal of fact, but the Supreme Court confirmed that departing from such evidence requires a rational basis. Where no such basis exists, the court will act on the unanimous opinion.
  • A prolonged period without psychiatric treatment, combined with a pre-existing diagnosis of chronic and severe schizophrenia, was central to the finding that the accused's mental state at the time of the offence met the legal threshold for the defence.
  • Under s 167 of the Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW), a related charge can be dealt with in the same proceeding as the principal charge, and a special verdict of not guilty by reason of mental illness can be returned for each charge where the same mental illness finding applies.
  • A special verdict of not guilty by reason of mental illness does not result in unconditional release. Under s 39 of the Mental Health (Forensic Provisions) Act 1990 (NSW), the accused is detained until released by due process of law, with the Mental Health Review Tribunal having an ongoing supervisory role.

Legislation and Cases Referenced

Legislation:
- Crimes Act 1900 (NSW)
- Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW), ss 132, 167
- Mental Health (Forensic Provisions) Act 1990 (NSW), ss 38, 39

Cases:
- The King v Porter [1933] HCA 1; (1933) 55 CLR 182
- R v M'Naghten (1843) 8 ER 718