R v Spencer [2020] NSWSC 386

Supreme Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Spencer [2020] NSWSC 386 Hearing dates: 7 April 2020 Date of orders: 09 April 2020 Decision date: 09 April 2020 Jurisdiction: Common Law Before: Hidden AJ Decision: 1. Accused found not guilty by reason of mental illness. 2. Ordered to be detained until released by due process of law. Catchwords: CRIMINAL LAW – trial by judge alone – murder – defence of mental illness Legislation Cited: Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW) Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) Mental Health (Forensic Provisions) Act 1990 (NSW) Mental Health Act 2007 (NSW). Cases Cited: Hawkins v The Queen (1994) 179 CLR 500 The King v Porter (1933) 55 CLR 182 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Regina (Crown) Matthew Spencer (Defendant) Representation: Counsel: Mr Liam Shaw (Crown) Mr Eric Wilson SC (Defendant)

Solicitors: Office of Department of Public Prosecutions (Crown) Aboriginal Legal Service (Defendant) File Number(s): 2018//279561 Publication restriction: Nil

Judgment 1. The accused, Matthew Spencer, is on trial before me, sitting without a jury, for the murder of his father, Shane Spencer. It is the Crown case that he killed his father on 11 September 2018 by stabbing him repeatedly at the home at Trundle where they were living. Pursuant to s 184 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW), on the advice of his counsel, he has made formal admissions of the elements of murder: that he caused the death of his father by stabbing him multiple times in the chest, with the intention of killing him. In any event, there is ample evidence in the Crown case to establish those elements beyond reasonable doubt. 2. The only issue in the trial is whether the accused has made out the defence of mental illness or, alternatively, the partial defence of substantial impairment under s 23A of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW). There is a large volume of material before me, including psychiatric reports obtained by the accused's representatives and by the Crown, tending to establish the defence of mental illness and rendering it unnecessary to consider the issue of substantial impairment. The Crown accepts that the defence of mental illness is made out. In the circumstances, it is unnecessary to address the evidence in detail. A relatively brief summary will suffice.