R v Sherrin-Hill

1. [1]

   HIS HONOUR: Tristan Sherrin-Hill is charged that on 16 October 2023, at Umina Beach in the State of NSW he did murder Daniel Bruns. He was committed for trial from the Local Court. At his arraignment on 5 June 2025, Mr Sherrin-Hill pleaded not guilty to that count. The sole issue in the trial was expected to be whether Mr Sherrin-Hill qualified for a special verdict of act proven but not criminally responsible. Since Mr Sherrin-Hill’s arraignment, the parties have agreed that the evidence to be tendered in the proceedings establishes a defence of mental health impairment. In that circumstance, the parties agree that it is appropriate to deal with the matter pursuant to s 31 of the Mental Health and Cognitive Impairment Forensic Provisions Act 2020.

Background

1. [2]

   In 2023, Mr Sherrin-Hill lived in Umina Beach. He was employed in his parents’ flue cleaning business and regularly worked with Mr Bruns, with whom he formed a close relationship. That relationship was, however, punctuated with periodic violence between the men. They also occasionally engaged in criminal activity together. Text messages recovered by police indicate the men had a habit of meeting each other in the late evening and early morning.

2. [3]

   In the early hours of 16 October 2023, Mr Bruns picked up Mr Sherrin-Hill in his partner's vehicle. They drove to the Ocean Beach Surf Life Saving Club and parked in the carpark. Whilst situated in the car park, Mr Sherrin-Hill produced a knife and stabbed Mr Bruns in the neck, chest, arms and leg a total of 30 times. One wound perforated his left internal carotid artery and left jugular vein which caused his death.

3. [4]

   Mr Sherrin-Hill sustained significant injuries to all four fingers on his left hand during the stabbing and these injuries later required surgical repair.

4. [5]

   Mr Sherrin-Hill left the area and at 1.43am and telephoned his father. After talking to his son for approximately two minutes, Roy Benchoam and his wife decided to search for him. They ultimately located Mr Bruns in the car at Ocean Beach. They alerted police who attended the scene and confirmed Mr Bruns was dead.

5. [6]

   Just before 6am, Mr Sherrin-Hill went to a friend’s house, who called Mr Sherrin-Hill’s father. He arranged for his daughter to collect Mr Sherrin-Hill and she took him to Gosford Police Station. Police called an ambulance and Mr Sherrin-Hill was taken to Gosford Hospital where he was admitted for treatment of his injuries. He remained an inpatient until 18 October 2023 when he was discharged and charged with the present offence.

Issue at Trial

1. [7]

   It is not in dispute that Mr Sherrin-Hill stabbed Mr Bruns on 16 October 2023 with at least the intention to cause grievous bodily harm. Nor is it in dispute that the injuries suffered by Mr Bruns from those wounds directly caused his death. Mr Sherrin-Hill contends that at the time of so doing he was suffering from a mental health impairment, namely schizoaffective disorder, and that he satisfies the requirements of s 28 of the Act so that he is not criminally responsible for his actions.

2. [8]

   Both experienced assessing psychiatrists have agreed upon the availability of the mental health defence. Mr Sherrin-Hill relies upon s 31 of the Act, which is in the following terms:

Section 31 Procedure

1. [9]

   In R v Jackson [2021] NSWSC 1404, Johnson J considered the provisions of s 31 as follows:

The Relevant Evidence

1. [10]

   Mr Sherrin-Hill has been assessed by Dr Richard Furst and Dr Adam Martin, both of whom are very experienced forensic psychiatrists. Both specialists agree that Mr Sherrin-Hill suffers from a mental health impairment, namely, schizoaffective disorder. With respect to the availability of the mental health defence, Dr Furst was of the following opinion:

2. [11]

   Dr Martin also addressed this issue in the following terms:

Consideration

1. [12]

   Both the Crown and the defence agree that the requirements of the mental health defence are established. Mr Sherrin-Hill is represented by an Australian Legal Practitioner. It remains for me to be satisfied that the material establishes that the defence is made out.

2. [13]

   In Da-Pra v R; R v Da-Pra [2014] NSWCCA 211 RA Hulme and Bellew JJ observed at [337]:

3. [14]

   There is no evidence before me that would cast any doubt on the evidence of Drs Furst and Martin. Accordingly, I am satisfied that the material establishes the mental health defence. It is appropriate that I return a verdict of act proven but not criminally responsible.

Consequential Orders

1. [15]

   Having returned that verdict, I am also required by s 33 of the Act to make a determination regarding Mr Sherrin-Hill’s immediate future.

2. [16]

   Dr Furst is of the opinion that he requires long term treatment by a forensic mental health service with antipsychotic medication. Dr Furst said that:

3. [17]

   Dr Martin does not expressly deal with this issue. However, I accept, having regard to Dr Furst’s opinion in the light of all of the evidence and the doctors’ detailed reports, that it would not be appropriate at this stage to release Mr Sherrin-Hill into the community.

4. [18]

   In these circumstances, the appropriate orders to make in this case are as follows:

   1. (1)

      In relation to the single count on the indictment, I enter a special verdict pursuant to s 31 of the Mental Health and Cognitive Impairment Forensic Provisions Act 2020 of act proven but not criminally responsible.

   2. (2)

      Pursuant to ss 33 and 34 of the Mental Health and Cognitive Impairment Forensic Provisions Act 2020 Tristan Sherrin-Hill is to be detained in a correctional facility or at such other place as determined by the Mental Health Review Tribunal, until released by due process of law.

   3. (3)

      Pursuant to s 34 of the Mental Health and Cognitive Impairment Forensic Provisions Act 2020, Tristan Sherrin-Hill is referred to the Mental Health Review Tribunal.

   4. (4)

      I direct the Registrar to notify the Minister for Health of these orders within 7 days.

   5. (5)

      I further direct the Registrar to notify the Mental Health Review Tribunal of the verdict and these orders within 7 days;

   6. (6)

      The Registrar is to provide the Mental Health Review Tribunal with a copy of these orders and my reasons for judgment and the exhibit within 7 days.

   7. (7)

      The Registrar is to notify Justice Health of the verdict and orders, and provide a copy of the reasons for judgment and orders and exhibit to Justice Health within 7 days.

Note

1. [19]

   When these proceedings were before me on 4 July 2025, I received oral victim impact statements from Katrina Butler, the partner of Mr Bruns, as well as a statement read on behalf of his family. Those statements are very poignant and bear witness to the unique distress and suffering caused by the death of Mr Bruns. I consider that I should make a further order in the circumstances as follows: