NSW Caselaw
New South Wales Supreme Court
CITATION : R v Vandersee [2000] NSWSC 916 revised - 15/11/2000 FILE NUMBER(S) : SC 70060/99 HEARING DATE(S) : 17/07/00, 18/07/00, 19/07/00, 21/07/00, 24/07/00, 25/07/00, 26/07/00, 27/07/00, 31/07/00, 1/08/00, 07/09/00, 08/09/00 JUDGMENT DATE : 18 September 2000
PARTIES : Regina v Lynette May Vandersee JUDGMENT OF : James J at 1
COUNSEL : W H W Norman - Crown A P Cook - Prisoner SOLICITORS : Ms I Chiumento - DPP S R Mullany - LAC CATCHWORDS : Criminal Law - sentencing - manslaughter - provocation DECISION : Sentenced to imprisonment for eight years - Non-parole period of five years. Sentence to commence on 01/08/2000
THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES CRIMINAL DIVISION
JAMES J
Monday 18 September 2000
70060/99 - REGINA v LYNETTE MAY VANDERSEE
REMARKS ON SENTENCE
1 HIS HONOUR : On 1 August 2000 after a trial presided over by me the jury found the prisoner Lynette May Vandersee not guilty of murder, but guilty of the manslaughter, of her husband Bruce Vandersee at Central Tilba on 30 June 1999. After the jury returned their verdict the proceedings on sentence were stood over for a number of weeks, to enable a pre-sentence report to be obtained. Under s24 of the Crimes Act the maximum penalty for manslaughter is imprisonment for twenty five years. 2 At the trial there was no real issue that in the early morning of 30 June 1999 the prisoner had killed her husband by striking him a number of times on the head, while he was sleeping, with the blunt end of the head of a small axe or tomahawk. Later on the same day 30 June 1999 the prisoner attended at the Bateman's Bay police station and told police that she had killed her husband. 3 The real issue at the trial was whether the prisoner should be found guilty of the murder of her husband or whether she should be found guilty of the lesser offence of the manslaughter of her husband. Under the directions the jury were given there were three possible ways in which the jury, having been satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that an act of the prisoner had caused the death of the deceased and that the prisoner's act had not been done in self defence, could have arrived at a verdict of guilty of manslaughter, namely:-
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate