R v Haydar [2017] NSWSC 127

Supreme Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Haydar [2017] NSWSC 127 Hearing dates: 9 February 2017 Date of orders: 09 February 2017 Decision date: 09 February 2017 Jurisdiction: Common Law - Criminal Before: Garling J Decision: Dismiss the Notice of Motion dated 1 February 2017 Catchwords: CRIMINAL LAW – application for trial by judge alone – murder – application of community standards – substantial impairment by abnormality of mind Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900 Criminal Procedure Act 1986 Evidence Act 1995 Cases Cited: R v Belghar [2012] NSWCCA 86 R v Farhad Qaumi (No 14 ) [2016] NSWSC 274 R v McNeil [2015] NSWSC 357 R v Simmons (No 4) [2015] NSWSC 259 R v Villalon [2013] NSWSC 1516 Texts Cited: Not Applicable Category: Procedural and other rulings Parties: The Crown Haydar Haydar (Applicant) Representation: Counsel: C Patrick SC (Crown) G James QC (Applicant)

Solicitors: Director of Public Prosecutions (Crown) Zahr Partners (Applicant) File Number(s): 2015/95401 Publication restriction: Not applicable

EX TEMPORE Judgment 1. The accused, Haydar Haydar, was charged on 29 February 2016 on an indictment with the following offences: 1. that on 30 March 2015 at Bexley in the State of New South Wales he did murder Salwa Haydar; 2. that on 30 March 2015 at Bexley in the State of New South Wales he did wound Ola Haydar with intent to cause grievous bodily harm; 3. in the alternative, that on 30 March 2015 at Bexley in the State of New South Wales he did recklessly wound Ola Haydar. 1. When arraigned on 1 July 2016, the accused pleaded not guilty to each of these offences and his trial was fixed to commence on 20 February 2017 with an estimate of two weeks. 2. Since that time, the accused has offered to plead guilty to manslaughter with respect to the offence of Count 1 of the indictment on the basis of substantial impairment of the kind sufficient to satisfy s 23A of the Crimes Act 1900. He has offered to plead guilty to the offence in Count 3. 3. Counsel for the accused told the Court that he understands that when arraigned at the start of his trial, the accused will plead in a way consistent with those offers. 4. On 11 January 2017, the Crown served three additional statements from the daughters of the accused and the deceased containing more extensive factual material than had previously been provided. 5. On 17 January 2017, the Crown served seven further police statements and two disks containing CCTV footage. 6. On 19 January 2017, the accused filed a notice of election under s 132(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act 1986 to be tried by a judge alone. 7. On 19 January 2017, the Crown served material required by ss 141 and 142 of the Criminal Procedure Act, including a Crown case statement. 8. On 25 January 2017, the Crown served on the accused a notice pursuant to s 67 of the Evidence Act 1995 indicating that it intended to introduce first‑hand hearsay evidence from the daughters of the accused and the deceased as contained in the additional statements served on 11 January 2017. 9. On 1 February 2017, the accused filed a Notice of Motion seeking an order that his trial proceed before a judge alone and not before a judge and jury. For the reasons which follow, the Notice of Motion is dismissed.