For the defence of accident under s 23B(2) of the Criminal Code (WA), the State need not prove that the precise mechanism or means of the victim's death was intended, foreseen or reasonably foreseeable; it is sufficient to prove that death by some mechanism or means of the nature or kind actually suffered was intended, foreseen or reasonably foreseeable. Where a victim dies of a cardiac arrest triggered by stress during a felony, the defence of accident must be left to the jury if there is an evidentiary foundation that the accused did not intend or foresee death by physiological dysfunction and an ordinary person would not reasonably have foreseen it. The 'wash over' effect argument — that setting aside a conviction on one count requires setting aside convictions on other counts tried together — will be rejected where the issues on each count are radically different and the jury was properly directed to consider each count separately.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 6 later cases that cite this judgment.