NSW Caselaw
New South Wales Supreme Court
CITATION : Regina v PFC [2010] NSWSC 834
HEARING DATE(S) : 26 July 2010
JUDGMENT DATE : 29 July 2010
JUDGMENT OF : R A Hulme J
DECISION : Sentenced to imprisonment for 5 years 2 months with a non-parole period of 3 years.
CATCHWORDS : CRIMINAL LAW - sentence - manslaughter - criminal negligence - 7 week old baby - failure by father to obtain medical attention after assault by child's mother - plea of guilty
LEGISLATION CITED : Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987
CATEGORY : Sentence
CASES CITED : R v Borkowski [2009] NSWCCA 102; 195 A Crim R 1
PARTIES : Regina PFC
FILE NUMBER(S) : SC 2009/7744
COUNSEL : Ms J Baly (Crown) Ms S Kluss (Offender)
SOLICITORS : Solicitor for Public Prosecutions A W Simpson & Co
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES COMMON LAW DIVISION CRIMINAL LIST
R A Hulme J
29 July 2010
2009/7744 Regina v PFC
JUDGMENT 1 HIS HONOUR: TC, a 7 week old boy, was assaulted by his mother, NLH, on 4 May 2006. His injuries resulted in his death in the early hours of 6 May 2006.
2 PFC was the boy's father. He became aware when he returned home on the afternoon of 4 May that the boy had been assaulted and injured. He did nothing to obtain medical attention until the afternoon of the following day. He has pleaded guilty to manslaughter, acknowledging that he was criminally negligent in failing in his duty of care to obtain medical attention for his son which would have prolonged and perhaps saved his life.
3 By pleading guilty to manslaughter by criminal negligence, the offender has acknowledged that his failure to obtain medical attention for his son warrants criminal punishment because his conduct fell far short of the standard of care which a reasonable person would have exercised in the circumstances; it involved a high risk of death or really serious bodily harm occurring; and the degree of his negligence involved conduct that is so serious that it should be treated as criminal conduct. It is important to acknowledge these matters because the case advanced by him on sentence has been, in effect, to characterise his failure in his duty as involving "errors of judgment".
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