JOYCE V. THE QUEEN

IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

Oral Judgment delivered at... SVONCY oo escescceeeceeseeseesneee

Friday 7th August 1970

JOYCE

THE QUEEN

ORDER

Application for special leave refused.

(36

JOvOR Ve

THE QUEEN

JUDGMENT BARWICK C.J.

JOYCE

ve

In ny opinion this is not a case for the grant of special leave to appeal. The applicant was convicted of the murder of a young woman with whom he had been associating.

She died from stab wounds received at the hand of the applicant. The applicant raised the question at the trial whether the acts of stabbing were relevantly his acts so as to attract criminal responsibility in him for them. The applicant said he did not remember any of the events of the fatal day during that period of time in which the deceased was killed. He called a duly qualified medical practitioner practising as a psychiatrist for some twenty years. The psychiatrist, basing himself largely on the statements made by the applicant and the evidence given in the trial, expressed the opinion that at the time of the killing the applicant was not psychologically in a condition where his acts were voluntary in the sense that his conscious mind accompanied the physical performance of the acts of stabbing. iThe psychiatrist's reasons for and explanation of his views are, to say the least, not easy of comprehension, but having regard to the opinion I have formed of the trial judge's summing up, I have no need to pursue those reasons or

explanations in order to decide whether in totality the evidence

2.

before the jury was such as could properly found a reasonable doubt in their minds as to whether the acts of stabbing were in truth and in law the conscious acts of the applicant.

I am prepared to deal with this application on the basis that there was evidence requiring the trial judge to deal with that specific issue in his summing up. In my opinion the trial judge did deal with that issue and did adequately direct the jury upon it.