[2025] SASC 23

Prosecution: THE KING Counsel: MR F NIEMANN - Solicitor: DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS (SA) Accused: BENAJMIN ANTHONY SHUMAN Counsel: MR C ISAACS - Solicitor: CALDICOTT & ISAACS LAWYERS Hearing Date/s: 24/02/2025 File No/s: SCCRM-24-008739 B SUPREME COURT OF SOUTH AUSTRALIA (Criminal) DISCLAIMER - Every effort has been made to comply with suppression orders or statutory provisions prohibiting publication that may apply to this judgment. The onus remains on any person using material in the judgment to ensure that the intended use of that material does not breach any such order or provision. Further enquiries may be directed to the Registry of the Court in which it was generated. R v SHUMAN Criminal Trial by Judge Alone [2025] SASC 23 Reasons for the Orders of the Honourable Justice Bampton 24 February 2025 CRIMINAL LAW - GENERAL MATTERS - CRIMINAL LIABILITY AND CAPACITY - DEFENCE MATTERS - INSANITY AND MENTAL IMPAIRMENT CRIMINAL LAW - PARTICULAR OFFENCES - OFFENCES AGAINST THE PERSON - HOMICIDE - MURDER Defendant charged with murder – defendant pleaded not guilty by reason of mental incompetence – investigation under Part 8A of the Criminal Law Consolidation Act 1935 (SA) – Court determined to proceed first with the trial of the defendant’s mental competence – investigation into defendant’s mental competence dispensed with – findings recorded that the defendant was mentally incompetent and that the objective elements of the offence are established beyond reasonable doubt – defendant found not guilty and declared liable to supervision. Criminal Law Consolidation Act 1935 (SA) ss 269B, 269E, 269F, 269D, 269F A, 269F B, 269C, 269T, 269Q, 269R, 269X, referred to. -- 1 of 5 -- -- 2 of 5 -- R v SHUMAN [2025] SASC 23 Criminal: Trial by Judge Alone 1 BAMPTON J: Benjamin Anthony Shuman is charged with the murder of Jason Douglas Wright (“the deceased”), alleged to have been committed on 17 June 2023 in the cell they were sharing at Yatala Labour Prison. Mr Shuman has pleaded not guilty, raising the defence of mental incompetence. 2 Mr Shuman is presumed to be mentally competent to commit an offence unless found, on an investigation under Part 8A of the Criminal Law Consolidation Act 1935 (SA) (“the Act”), to have been mentally incompetent to commit the offence with which he is charged. 3 Mr Shuman has elected to have an investigation under Part 8A dealt with by a judge sitting alone pursuant to s 269B(1)(a) of the Act. 4 Pursuant to s 269E(2) of the Act, I have determined to proceed first with the trial of Mr Shuman’s mental competence to commit the alleged offence in accordance with the procedure prescribed by s 269F of the Act. 5 Mr Shuman has the onus of displacing the presumption of mental competence pursuant to s 269D of the Act. 6 The reports of forensic psychiatrists, Dr Catherine Crouch dated 21 June 2024 and Dr Amisha Jayawant dated 1 December 2024, on the question of Mr Shuman’s mental competence to commit the alleged offence were, with the consent of the prosecution and defence, received into evidence pursuant to s 269F A(1) of the Act. 7 Having assessed Mr Shuman and reviewed collateral information, Dr Crouch and Dr Jayawant are each of the opinion that Mr Shuman has a mental impairment, namely bipolar disorder. Further they each consider on the balance of probabilities that Mr Shuman was mentally incompetent as defined under s 269C of the Act to commit the offence of murder. 8 Dr Crouch reported Mr Shuman’s bipolar disorder had been largely untreated for an extended period of time prior to his incarceration. She is of the opinion Mr Shuman was suffering a manic relapse of his bipolar disorder at the time of the alleged offence. Dr Crouch considered that Mr Shuman appeared to be aware of the nature and quality of his actions at the time of the alleged offence, however, his behaviour appeared to be largely driven by his dysregulated state. In consequence of his mental impairment, Dr Crouch concluded that, at the time of the alleged offending, Mr Shuman was not able to reason about whether his conduct, as perceived by reasonable people, was wrong as defined by s 269C(b) of the Act. -- 3 of 5 -- [2025] SASC 23 Bampton J 2 9 Dr Jayawant agreed with Dr Crouch’s opinion that Mr Shuman’s bipolar disorder had been untreated for at least two years prior to the alleged offence and that around the time of the alleged offence, he was experiencing a manic relapse of bipolar disorder. Dr Jayawant noted Mr Shuman’s presentation following the alleged offence, including his detention at James Nash House for nine weeks (the first two weeks in seclusion), and the fact that his mental state began to settle after treatment was commenced supports this opinion. Dr Jayawant concluded that Mr Shuman was aware of the nature and quality of his actions at the time of the alleged offence. However, in consequence of his manic state at the time of the alleged offence, his ability to reason whether his conduct was wrong, as perceived by reasonable people, was impaired. 10 Having regard to the psychiatric opinions and noting that the prosecution and defence agree, pursuant to s 269F A(5)(a) of the Act, I dispense with the investigation into Mr Shuman’s mental competence to commit the alleged offence. Pursuant to s 269F A(5)(b) of the Act, I record a finding that Mr Shuman was mentally incompetent to commit the offence of murder on 17 June 2023. 11 Having made the finding that Mr Shuman was mentally incompetent to commit the alleged offence, I must inquire into whether the objective elements of the offence have been established pursuant to s 269F B of the Act. 12 The prosecution relies on affidavits of witnesses whose evidence is detailed in the prosecution case statement. Mr Shuman admits the facts deposed to in the affidavits relied on by the prosecution. Mr Shuman concedes that the evidence establishes beyond reasonable doubt the objective elements of the offence of murder. 13 The forensic pathologist, Dr Stephen Wills, determined, following a post-mortem performed on 18 June 2023, that the cause of death was head and neck injuries with retroperitoneal and thigh haematoma. Dr Wills concluded that the post-mortem findings were: … indicative of a blunt force assault centred mainly around the head and neck area with further extensive haematoma of the groin, upper thigh, lower abdomen and external genitalia in continuity with right-sided acute retroperitoneal haemorrhage indicative of a forceful blunt injury [to] this area that may be the result of one or more blows, potentially kicks or stamps. 14 Having considered the prosecution evidence, the only available inference is that Mr Shuman punched, kicked, and stomped on the deceased and, in doing so, caused his death. Accordingly, I record a finding pursuant to s 269F B(2) of the Act that the objective elements of the offence of murder are established beyond reasonable doubt. 15 Having found the objective elements established, pursuant to s 269F B(3) of the Act I find Mr Shuman not guilty of the offence of murder and declare him liable to supervision under Division 4, Subdivision 2 of the Act. -- 4 of 5 -- [2025] SASC 23 Bampton J 3 16 I order a report be prepared pursuant to section 269T(2)(a) of the Act. 17 I adjourn the matter allowing time for the provision of s 269Q and s 269R reports, in addition to the s 269T report. 18 Pursuant to s 269X(2)(b) of the Act, I make an order committing the defendant to custody to 30 May 2025. -- 5 of 5 --