The Pemble obligation to leave alternative verdicts to the jury does not arise where the nature of the wounds is such that, once the jury rejects the accused's account that the wounds were accidental, the only available inference is intent to kill or inflict grievous bodily harm — there being no intermediate factual finding available to support unlawful and dangerous act manslaughter. Where an accused's case is that the fatal wounds were accidental and the accused does not claim to have acted in self-defence, the trial judge is not obliged to leave self-defence or excessive self-defence to the jury. A sentencing judge does not err in failing to apply s 22A of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW) where no submission relying on that provision was made at first instance.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 24 later cases that cite this judgment.
6 of the 24 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.