A Brisbane woman charged with murder after allegedly aiding the suicide of her terminally ill husband has been granted bail.
Kylie Truswell-Mobbs, 50, was charged in April last year over the December 2023 death of David Mobbs, 56, who was suffering from motor neurone disease (MND).
Ms Truswell-Mobbs had been remanded in custody since, after her initial bail application to the Supreme Court on 22 April last year was refused.
Her second application for bail was granted in Brisbane on Tuesday by Justice Paul Smith, who ruled she had established there had been a material change of circumstances.
Her defence team submitted that a committal hearing on 16 February this year revealed more favourable evidence, and now there was a stronger chance of a conviction on a lesser charge such as of manslaughter or aiding suicide, or an acquittal.
It also submitted that the risk of interference with witnesses had diminished now that they had given evidence at the committal hearing, and that bail conditions could ameliorate risks associated with her release on bail.
It stated that it would ask for the same direction as that given by Justice James Henry in R v Yalu in Cairns Supreme Court last month, that a jury is “entitled to apply in favour of an accused what might be described as their innate sense of fairness and justice in place of the strict principles of law”.
The Crown opposed bail, submitting that the case for murder was strong, that there was no material change of circumstances, and that there was no basis in law to give the Yalu direction.
The hearing heard that in a police interview, Ms Truswell-Mobb explained that her husband did not want to wait to die and had asked her to administer medications via his feeding tube.
“She held him until he went to sleep in her arms. She ‘busted her guts’ to give him the best in the last five months of his life. She loved him and looked after him. He was her whole world. She explained the medication she gave to him. She explained how she gave him the medication,” Justice Smith said.
He said the committal hearing provided more evidence supporting what Ms Truswell-Mobbs said in her interview.
He said the couple’s son Rylee gave evidence that his father was “tired, wanted to die, and wanted to be free of the disease”.
“Rylee knew it [death] was the best thing for him and that was what David wanted. He said that David stated multiple times that he was tired and wanted to be done. He did not like the idea of being a vegetable and did not want to continue living past that point. He also said that the applicant was present on the occasions when David said that he wanted to die. He also gave evidence that the applicant told him that David would commence end of life procedures,” he said.
“David definitely indicated to him that he wanted to die and wanted to overdose.”
Other son Jayden gave evidence that his father wanted to die at home, surrounded by the people he loved, and not in hospital.
Mr Mobbs’ sister and regular carers also gave concurring evidence of discussions with him about his end-of-life wishes.
At a palliative care meeting in early December 2023, a doctor had explained that voluntary assisted dying was “something different with which the palliative care team could not assist” the family, and that the scheme took at least nine days, possibly weeks.
Justice Smith said that ultimately, it was a matter for the trial judge as to whether a Yalu direction was given, but that the evidence elicited at the committal hearing “may well lead” to that.
“There is also a more realistic possibility that there may be an acquittal entirely or a conviction for manslaughter or perhaps aiding suicide,” he said.
He said the evidence revealed Mr Mobbs was resolute in his desire to die, and had communicated this to others over the course of his illness and on the evening of his death.
It also revealed that the applicant was “utterly devoted” to her husband, and that his family held no ill will toward her.
“There are also other factors to be considered in this case. There is the character and background of the applicant. The applicant is a woman of 50 years of age who was devoted to her husband. She is of exemplary character. She has absolutely no previous convictions. Her ties are in the jurisdiction,” he said.
Justice Smith concluded there was little risk of reoffending or of flight, and in relation to the risk of interfering with witnesses, he pointed to factors including her continued contact with her sons since December 2023.
“Despite the seriousness of the charge and the evidence available, I am satisfied that the applicant has shown a change of circumstances and also exceptional circumstances,” he said.
Read the decision here.
Share this article