R v Puckeridge [2000] NSWCCA 193

New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal

CITATION : R v Puckeridge [2000] NSWCCA 193 FILE NUMBER(S) : CCA 60722/97 HEARING DATE(S) : 19/05/00 JUDGMENT DATE : 5 June 2000

PARTIES : Regina v Roy Robert Puckeridge JUDGMENT OF : Heydon JA at 1; James J at 2; Bell J at 51

LOWER COURT JURISDICTION : Supreme Court LOWER COURT FILE NUMBER(S) : 70012/96 LOWER COURT JUDICIAL Ireland J OFFICER :

COUNSEL : PG Berman - Crown GP Craddock - Appellant SOLICITORS : SE O'Connor - Crown TA Murphy - Appellant

DECISION : Appeal dismissed

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL 60722/97 Heydon JA James J Bell J

Monday 5 June 2000 REGINA v Roy Robert Puckeridge

JUDGMENT

1 HEYDON JA. I agree with James J 2 JAMES J: This is an appeal by Roy Robert Puckeridge against his conviction after a trial in the Supreme Court before Ireland J and a jury on a charge of murdering Patricia Merle Thomas at Northmead between 10 August 1995 and 22 August 1995. 3 This is not the first time this appeal has been before this Court. The appeal first came before this Court, differently constituted, in 1998. The Court then held, by majority, that the appeal should be allowed and the appellant's conviction should be quashed, on the ground that the evidence at the trial was not capable of excluding a reasonable possibility that Mrs Thomas' death had not been caused by an act of the appellant. 4 The High Court granted the Crown special leave to appeal from this decision of the Court of Criminal Appeal and on the hearing of the appeal to the High Court it was conceded by counsel for the respondent to that appeal, that is the present appellant, that the appeal to the High Court should be allowed. The High Court allowed the appeal, set aside the orders made by the Court of Criminal Appeal and remitted the present appellant's appeal against conviction to the Court of Criminal Appeal for the hearing and determination of the other grounds of appeal relied on by the appellant. 5 At the trial and on the hearing of this appeal there was no dispute about any of the following facts. Mrs Thomas lived alone in a unit in a block of units at Northmead. In August 1995 the appellant also lived in a unit in the same block of units, which he shared with a man named Campbell. The appellant had formerly lived in another unit in the same block, which he had shared with a man named McIlroy. On 13 August 1995 Mrs Thomas attended a church service. On 20 September 1995 her body was found in a shallow grave in a garden near the unit occupied by McIlroy. On 18 August 1995 a plumber had repaired a pipe, which had been broken during the digging of the grave. Accordingly, it was clear that Mrs Thomas had died at some time between 13 August 1995 and 18 August 1995. By the time Mrs Thomas' body was found on 20 September 1995, it had become seriously decomposed. 6 The Crown case that the appellant had murdered Mrs Thomas depended largely on the evidence of Campbell, including evidence of admissions which Campbell said had been made by the appellant, and evidence by other witnesses of admissions which they said the appellant had made to them. Having regard to the nature of the grounds of appeal now relied on, it is sufficient simply to give a brief outline of this evidence. 7 Before he gave evidence at the appellant's trial, Campbell had pleaded guilty to being an accessory after the fact to the murder of Mrs Thomas. In his evidence at the trial, Campbell denied that he had himself killed Mrs Thomas. He said in evidence at the trial that one morning the appellant had told him that he, the appellant, had killed Mrs Thomas on the previous evening. Campbell did not believe the appellant but he went into Mrs Thomas' unit on the following evening, in order to check. He saw Mrs Thomas' body lying against a wall of her unit. There was blood coming from a wound on the back of her head. Mrs Thomas' body remained lying in her unit for some time. The appellant then decided that her body should be buried and the appellant and Campbell dug the grave in the garden and buried the body. At the trial a strong attack was made by the defence on the reliability of Campbell's evidence. 8 Evidence was also given in the Crown case by two prison informers named Hathaway and Leonard, who said that the appellant, while on remand after having been arrested and charged with the murder of Mrs Thomas, had made admissions to them that he had killed Mrs Thomas. The appellant had told each of these witnesses that he had not been alone when Mrs Thomas had been killed; he had been accompanied by Campbell. The appellant and Campbell had entered through a window of Mrs Thomas' unit. When Mrs Thomas woke up, each of the appellant and Campbell had assaulted her. The appellant had dragged Mrs Thomas from her bed, bashed her head against a wall a number of times, until her head started bleeding, and had then strangled her. 9 It is apparent that Campbell's evidence of what had allegedly happened differed in a number of respects from the prison informers' evidence of what had allegedly happened. 10 The prison informers also gave evidence that the appellant had written out in his own handwriting an account of what the appellant said had really happened when Mrs Thomas was killed. The appellant had wanted Hathaway to use this written account as a script, for the purpose of enabling Hathaway to make false allegations against Campbell that Campbell had confessed to Hathaway that he had killed Mrs Thomas. This document written out by the appellant became an exhibit at the trial. 11 The appellant also wrote out in his own handwriting another document which became an exhibit at the trial. This further document purported to be a contract, whereby the appellant hired Hathaway and Leonard to kill Campbell in consideration of payment of the sum of $2,000. 12 At the trial a strong attack was made by the defence on the reliability of the evidence of Hathaway and Leonard. 13 Other evidence of admissions made by the appellant was given in the Crown case by other witnesses, including Mr McIlroy and his wife. A police officer gave evidence that, while he was searching a packet of cigarettes taken from the appellant, he observed the appellant attempting to hide Mrs Thomas' bank keycard. 14 The appellant gave evidence in his own case at the trial. He said that one night Campbell, while drunk, had said words to the effect that he had it in mind to kill Mrs Thomas, that Campbell had gone out of the unit which he and the appellant shared, that Campbell had later returned to the unit and that after Campbell had returned he had said that he had killed Mrs Thomas. Subsequently, the appellant had assisted Campbell to dig the grave and bury Mrs Thomas' body. 15 It is apparent that, by returning their verdict of guilty, the jury rejected the appellant's account of the events leading up to the death of Mrs Thomas and were satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant had assaulted Mrs Thomas, before she died. In the remarks he made on sentencing the appellant, Ireland J made a number of findings of fact about the events which had led up to Mrs Thomas' death. On the hearing of this appeal we were informed by counsel for the appellant that, for the purposes of the appeal against conviction, no concession was made about the correctness of Ireland J's findings of fact. However, having regard to the nature of the grounds of appeal now relied on, which are based on alleged erroneous directions by the trial judge, it is unnecessary to make any further examination of the events leading up to Mrs Thomas' death. 16 The outstanding grounds of appeal as stated in the notice of appeal are:- "1. His Honour erred in his directions to the jury upon cause of death. 2. His Honour erred in failing to adequately direct the jury in relation to the appellant's case. 3. His Honour erred in his directions to the jury upon the onus and standard of proof".