Murder & Accessory after the fact: R v AH

Murder or Accessory after the fact?

The Crown ran alternate cases: the first was that our client had struck the victim with a bottle, killing him; the second was that our client’s partner had struck and killed the victim, and our client had assisted in burying the body. The first case corresponded with a charge of murder, the second with a charge of accessory after the fact.

Not Guilty of either offence

O’Brien Solicitors criminal defence lawyers ran the defence, ultimately accepted by the court, that the client had nothing to do with the murder and only assisted in the cover-up of the murder under duress from her violent partner. In support of this defence. O’Brien Solicitors raised evidence of the partner’s history of extreme violence. This domestic violence resulted in her suffering from battered woman syndrome.

The client was found not guilty on both the murder charge and the accessory after the fact charge.

See our other murder case studies.

If you are facing murder charges, contact our criminal defence lawyers immediately.

  • murder
  • section 18 Crimes Act 1900
  • accessory after the fact
  • section 347 Crimes Act 1900
  • duress
  • domestic violence
  • battered woman syndrome
  • not guilty


O’Brien Criminal & Civil Solicitors
p: 02 9261 4281
a: Level 4, 219-223 Castlereagh St,
Sydney NSW 2000

Scroll to Top