Pickett v Western Australia [2020] HCA 20

HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

KIEFEL CJ, BELL, KEANE, NETTLE AND GORDON JJ

Matter No P45/2019

ROBERT CHRISTOPHER JAMES PICKETT APPELLANT

AND

THE STATE OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA RESPONDENT

Matter No P46/2019

STEFAN LAZBA MEAD APPELLANT

AND

THE STATE OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA RESPONDENT

Matter No P47/2019

CLINTON FREDRICK MEAD APPELLANT

AND

THE STATE OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA RESPONDENT

Matter No P48/2019

DYLAN TERRANCE WAYNE ANTHONY APPELLANT

AND

THE STATE OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA RESPONDENT

Matter No P49/2019

TSM (A CHILD) APPELLANT

AND

THE STATE OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA RESPONDENT

Pickett v Western Australia Mead v Western Australia Mead v Western Australia Anthony v Western Australia TSM (a child) v Western Australia [2020] HCA 20 Date of Hearing: 13 March 2020 Date of Judgment: 29 May 2020 P45/2019, P46/2019, P47/2019, P48/2019 & P49/2019

ORDER

In each matter:

Appeal dismissed.

On appeal from the Supreme Court of Western Australia

Representation

S Vandongen SC with A J Robson for the appellants in all matters (instructed by Legal Aid WA)

A L Forrester SC with L M Fox for the respondent in all matters (instructed by Director of Public Prosecutions (WA))

Notice: This copy of the Court's Reasons for Judgment is subject to formal revision prior to publication in the Commonwealth Law Reports.

CATCHWORDS

Pickett v Western Australia Mead v Western Australia Mead v Western Australia Anthony v Western Australia TSM (a child) v Western Australia

Criminal law – Parties to offences – Where group of eight males assaulted victim – Where group included appellants and a youth aged 11 years ("PM") – Where one member of group stabbed victim causing death – Where appellants charged with murder under Criminal Code (WA) – Where Crown alleged seven males who did not stab victim deemed to have taken part in committing offence under s 7(b), s 7(c) or s 8 of Criminal Code – Where ss 7(b), 7(c) and 8 of Criminal Code operated when "an offence is committed" – Where reasonably possible that PM inflicted fatal stab wound – Where PM could not be criminally responsible for acts unless he had capacity to know he ought not to do act under s 29 of Criminal Code – Where prosecution adduced no evidence to establish capacity – Where trial judge declined to direct jury that they could not convict appellants of murder unless satisfied beyond reasonable doubt PM did not cause death – Where appellants convicted of murder – Whether trial judge erred in declining to direct jury that they could not convict appellants of murder unless satisfied that PM did not cause death – Whether "offence" committed for purposes of ss 7(b), 7(c) and 8 where failure to prove criminal responsibility of person who may have done act constituting offence.