PARKER [2007] NSWSC 753

New South Wales Supreme Court

CITATION : PARKER [2007] NSWSC 753

HEARING DATE(S) : On written submissions

JUDGMENT DATE : 12 July 2007

JURISDICTION : Common Law Division Criminal List

JUDGMENT OF : Kirby J

DECISION : Application for an inquiry under s474D Crimes Act 1900 dismissed.

CATCHWORDS : CRIMINAL LAW - application for an order under s474D Crimes Act 1900 - Special Hearing "conviction" for manslaughter 1988 - appeal to CCA refused - earlier appn under s474D dismissed - whether grounds already determined at trial, or appeal or in reasons for refusing previous application - whether DNA tests now available - whether grounds raise a question of doubt as to guilt.

LEGISLATION CITED : Crimes Act 1900

R v Parker (1990) 19 NSWLR 177 CASES CITED : Sinclair v The King (1946) 73 CLR 316 Varley v AG (1987-8) NSWLR 30

PARTIES : Michael John PARKER (Applicant)

FILE NUMBER(S) : SC 2006/72008

SOLICITORS : G Leeson -Villamanta Legal Service (Appl) W Abadee -Crown Solicitor's Office (Crown)

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES COMMON LAW DIVISION CRIMINAL LIST

JUSTICE DAVID KIRBY

Thursday 12 July 2007

2006/72008 APPLICATION OF Michael John PARKER [No 2]

DETERMINATION

1 KIRBY J: In May 2006, a number of documents were received by the Criminal Registry of the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The documents included an unsigned handwritten letter, a handwritten statement signed by "T Charlton" and a number of newspaper clippings. They related to the "conviction" for manslaughter in 1988 of Michael John Parker ("the applicant"). The victim was Faye Louise Charlton, who died in November 1983. The unsigned letter was apparently written by Mr Parker's mother although he, at the time, had no knowledge of it. 2 The purpose of the unsigned letter was to seek an inquiry under s474D of the Crimes Act 1900 into the "conviction". There had been a previous application for an inquiry, made under the same section, in 1994. It was referred to the Chief Judge at Common Law, Mr Justice David Hunt. Mr Justice Hunt, however, dismissed the application. A person who has been convicted of an offence (or someone on his or her behalf) may make a further application, pointing to fresh evidence which gives rise to a doubt concerning that conviction. Here, it seemed to me appropriate to view the documents submitted by the applicant's mother as an application made on his behalf. The issue is whether the matters identified in these documents give rise to a doubt concerning the conviction, justifying an inquiry. 3 Before examining this material, I should describe the background to this application.