JUDGMENT
1 HIS HONOUR: Linda Jane Walicki (the accused) has been indicted upon three counts charging, respectively, the murder of Michael Walicki (her father), the murder of Kathryn Walicki (one of her sisters) and wounding with intent to murder Susan Walicki (her mother). Upon her election and with the consent of the prosecutor, the trial has been heard without a jury. To each count she has pleaded not guilty. The entirety of the evidence has been received by the consent tender of documents. The Crown is represented by a Deputy Senior Crown Prosecutor and the accused is represented by Senior Counsel. There is no contest between the parties and it is the submission of both counsel that the appropriate verdict on all counts should be not guilty by reason of mental illness. As will appear and for the reasons following, I accept that submission.
2 The evidence includes an agreed statement of facts which is extracted from the statements and reports which accompany it. Whilst there are some differences in the recollection of detail and the recounting of observations by various witnesses, the differences are insignificant. I accept the expression of facts and the content of documentation. Nothing will be gained by recitation of all this material and it will suffice to summarize my findings concerning the basic facts and circumstances of the offences and the mental state of the accused at the relevant time.
3 The accused is the third born child of the six children of her parents. As at 5 July 2007 she resided in premises which had been the family home for some 25 years. It was a substantial two storey brick residence. Over a long period before that date the accused had manifested signs of perceptible mental disturbance and her parents had sought treatment for her. I shall return to relate some of this history but it is convenient to focus on the charges by noting events commencing from the evening of 4 July.
4 In the early part of that evening the accused was having what family members described as panic attacks and was turning "towards aggression". She appeared unwilling to eat and her mother fed her. She oscillated between requesting to be taken to hospital and then proclaiming that she was not sick. At about 8 pm she left the house and her father, sister Kathryn and brother Peter followed and accompanied her. She simply walked up and down the street in which the residence was located.
5 Whilst walking she spoke "a lot of weird stuff". She pointed to a spot on the ground and said that they had to stay there and hold hands for 30 minutes. A suggestion that she sit down on a bench was met with a response that it was not safe. She expressed a conviction that someone was behind a fence waiting to "get us". Quite unreferenced to any discussion she commenced to make enquiries about the workings of guns. Her father responded in order to try and divert her attention. She was reluctant to return to the house because "people were going to come and steal her and kill us all".
6 Eventually she was persuaded to go inside and she was later observed to be violently striking the keyboard of her computer.
7 Sometime after midnight she came into Peter's bedroom, wakened him and demanded to know the password for his email account. His failure to respond immediately was met with an outburst of uncharacteristically vulgar language. The parents came to the scene but the accused again tried to leave the house but was restrained and relieved of keys which she had obtained. She continued screaming and uttering obscenities.
8 The accused's mother persuaded her to take some medication (Valium) and after this she appeared to calm down but she did not seem to sleep.
9 After daylight on the morning of 5 July, her mother fed her some scrambled eggs and reminded her that she had an appointment to see a psychiatrist Dr Lucire. The accused said that she couldn't go but she was coaxed into entering the car. On the journey she asked to go home but, accompanied by both her parents, they arrived at a car park adjacent to the doctor's office. The accused expressed fear that there was a bomb in the car park but she accompanied her mother to a toilet which was on the way to the office. As Susan Walicki went to enter a cubicle the accused commenced to beat her with her fists. A bystander came to her aid and, alerted by the commotion, Michael Walicki attended and took custody of the accused.
10 Mrs Walicki fetched Dr Lucire who came down and took the accused, who refused to mount an escalator, to a nearby coffee shop. Dr Lucire told the parents that she could not make a diagnosis without a consultation in her rooms and she advised that the accused be taken home and to return to see her in the following week.
11 I interpolate that there was tendered a copy of a notification to the New South Wales Medical Board signed by Drs Furst and Guiffrida, psychiatrists at Justice Health, concerning Dr Lucire's assessment and treatment of the accused. The evidence does not include any response by Dr Lucire. It does include a letter authored by Dr Lucire dated 4 November 2006 addressed to "The Magistrate" in which she expresses opinion about increasing depression, psychosis and akathisia as a result of side effects of drugs which were then being administered to the accused at Banks House, a psychiatric unit attached to Bankstown-Lidcombe Hospital. The letter claims that a particular drug was "unlawfully given" and that the accused was psychotic, had a religious mania which could be schizophrenic and "will not recover" on the medication which was then being administered. There was a hearing by a visiting magistrate with a view to a community treatment order pursuant to mental health legislation but it is an agreed fact that the letter from Dr Lucire was not put before the magistrate. I refer to this matter to observe that I am not in a position to resolve the obvious underlying dispute which can be identified from the notification by Justice Health and Dr Lucire's letter, nor is it necessary for me so to do in order to reach verdicts on the indictment.
12 I return to the narrative of facts. The accused and her parents arrived home after her mother had gone to see their local GP, who in turn had contacted Dr Lucire who indicated that she was happy to see the accused in the future on a twice weekly basis. After the return home Susan Walicki felt a need to get out of the house and she went outside to mow the lawn and Kathryn, her daughter, came to assist. The accused and her father remained inside.
13 I am satisfied to the necessary standard that whilst in the house the accused armed herself with a long bladed knife and with requisite intent inflicted multiple stab wounds on her father and that he died as a result thereof. The accused then came out of the house and, in a regression to the language of childhood, said "Mummy, Mummy, something bad has happened but I don't know what it is, can you come in and have a look". Susan Walicki entered the house and saw her husband lying on the floor in a pool of blood. As she bent over him the accused made a frenzied attack, stabbing her mother in the back with the knife. I am satisfied that the multiple stabbings then inflicted were woundings and were accompanied by the intent as charged in the third count of the indictment.
14 Susan Walicki, although severely injured, managed to evade the accused by making her way through a back door and she went to Kathryn who had resumed the lawnmowing. The accused came out of the house and started to chase Kathryn who ran inside. The accused followed her. I am satisfied that whilst inside the house, the accused with the same intent inflicted multiple stab wounds upon Kathryn who died as a result of those wounds.
15 The remaining issue is the mental responsibility of the accused for these acts at the time of the killings and the wounding. It casts considerable light upon the issue to consider the conduct of the accused as observed immediately thereafter.
16 A next door neighbour, a Mr Galloway, had come to assist Susan Walicki who was lying on the ground. Whilst he was so doing the accused simply walked from the house carrying the knife. She looked at Mr Galloway who thought that she appeared calm and she walked away. Later he noticed her still carrying the knife and she walked past the driveway to his house. He noticed her approach a white Mazda sedan and get into the front seat. Obviously, he then turned his attention to trying to assist the critically injured Susan Walicki.
17 The Mazda sedan was being driven by Mr Borg, another resident of the street. The accused had signalled him to stop which he did. She spoke to him through the passenger window. She said, "Are you here to pick me up?" And he replied, "Do you need a lift?" She said, "Are you here to take me?" And he said, "I don't think so". But she got into the passenger seat of his car. He noticed blood on her clothing and on her arm. He asked her, "Where are we going?" And she replied, "Aren't you the person taking me to Croatia?" He said, "Oh, I don't think so" and she responded, "You mustn't be the person I'm waiting for". She then got out of the car.
18 This exchange and the remarks of the accused are self evidently bizarre and they are even more so with the inexplicable reference to Croatia. The evidence is that the accused's father was Australian born but of Polish descent and her mother comes from several generations of Australian born ancestors. Whilst the conduct and words of the accused cannot be judged by rational standards there is no clue as to why she would consider that she would be going to Croatia.
19 Shortly afterwards the accused again entered Mr Borg's car. She declined his enquiry as to whether she would like to go to hospital but in answer to his further query she said that it would be good to go to the police station. Before they could set off, she again alighted from the car. At this time Mr Borg saw a police vehicle arrive and he approached it and reported what had happened to the officers.
20 After the accused left Mr Borg's car she ran to another vehicle which was being driven by Mrs McCubben, another resident of the street. Mrs McCubben locked her car preventing entry by the accused who then walked on down the street. She was stopped by Constable Sheldrick who drew his pistol and ordered her to lie on the ground. She complied and was placed under arrest.
21 As other police were arriving, the accused was making intermittent remarks. She referred to having "butchered" her family. She exhibited some confusion about the number of victims. Later the accused was taken by ambulance officers to Liverpool Hospital. As she had been arrested, she was escorted by Constable Beltrami. He took a note of conversations which the accused had with Ambulance Officer Mannion. The text of the exchanges offers compelling examples of the accused's irrationality. The initial notes read: (M refers to Ambulance Officer Mannion and A to the accused):
"M Why did you go to Rozelle for?
A Because I was pregnant.
M How old is the baby?
A She's dead.
A Where the fuck am I?
M You're at the hospital.
A I don't want to be at the fucking hospital.
M Who did this to your hands?
A This bitch Danny did them.
M Do you know Danny?
A She's a whore. I know her face she's fourteen."
22 The accused has never been pregnant and the evidence does not identify "Danny". The constable noted further conversation:
"M How did these cuts happen to your hand?
A Because I was rapped (sic) today. I just want a fucking knife. I want more killing.
A short time later the accused said:
A I've been at Kogarah before for fucking too many people.
M What suburb do you live in?
A Marrickville.
M What street?
A Fucksville.
Short time later the accused said:
A More I need more. The fucking knife, the fucking knife. In the front door."
23 Constable Meekin who had arrived at the scene with Constable Beltrami followed the ambulance to the hospital. After they arrived there, he saw the accused with Ambulance Officer Hume and a triage nurse. I extract from the agreed statement of facts a description of what Constable Meekin saw:
"He observed that the accused became anxious and started to yell and scream:
'A I hate religion, fuck, fuck, fuck. My name is Joy I want to go back to Marrickville. My name is Joy and I live in Marrickville.
A Today is Sunday. My pain is not that bad I should be able to go home.
A do you know what would be scary; the end of the world, a good place to go would be with all the murderers and rapists'.
Following these statements by the accused she then started to scream and laugh. After several minutes she appeared to become angry and said 'I want to die, die, die, die, die, die I want her to die the bitch; I want the bitch to die. My mans a bastard, its disgusting, die, die, die, die, die, die, die, die.'
Following this outburst the accused then started to kick and scream and shake uncontrollably. The accused was restrained by hospital staff and then sedated."
24 As I have mentioned, the evidence of family members is that the use of crude language was not part of the accused's ordinary behaviour.
25 That an incipient mental illness was becoming florid was detectable for some time before the events of 4 and 5 July 2007. Among other signs and symptoms the accused was considered by a number of people, both family members and friends, as having developed a religious mania. She was known to be approaching people with unacceptable zealotry. She had, over a period of time moved between a number of sects of Christianity, her final association being with a Pentecostal ministry called "Hope Central", which was part of the Assemblies of God. To them she attempted to make very large donations but on being apprised of relevant circumstances the church refunded the money.
26 It is not necessary to elaborate on these aspects nor upon the accused's encounters whilst employed as an apprentice chef. Neither is it necessary to discuss a failed relationship which the accused had with a young man nor with those with whom she shared accommodation when living away from home (at one time she shared a house with her sister and another) save to say that it was a common experience for all these people to observe that there was "something wrong" with the accused.
27 She had returned to the family home in about August 2006. It was after this return that her mother became aware that she harboured a thought that she was possessed by an evil spirit. The accused sought to "talk about Jesus all the time" and she went on long walks at strange hours, calling in and speaking to people about Him. Her behaviour was of such concern that on 24 October 2006 Susan Walicki approached the police and as a consequence of her call the accused was taken to be assessed at Banks House. She was diagnosed as schizophrenic and on 1 November 2006 a visiting magistrate ordered that she be detained for 14 days. On 15 November the accused again appeared before the visiting magistrate and the evidence includes a "Form 20" under the Mental Health Act 1990. This pro forma indicates by a series of ticks the findings of the magistrate that the accused was then on the balance or (sic) probabilities suffering from a mental illness characterised by (a) delusions; (b) hallucinations; (d) severe disturbance of mood and (e) sustained or repeated irrational behaviour indicating the presence of any one or more of the symptoms (including (a) (b) and (d) as stated).
28 The further finding was indicated:
"Owing to that illness and the continuing condition of the person and the likely effects of any likely deterioration in that condition, I further find that there are reasonable grounds for believing that, care treatment or control of the person is necessary:
(a) for the person's own protection from serious harm."
29 However, further in the document under the heading "Final Orders" it is recorded:
"I find the patient not to be a mentally ill person under the Mental Health Act 1990 for the following reasons no active characteristics of the illness present and no longer likely to harm herself".