By Paul Gregoire and Ugur Nedim
During sentencing in March 2025, NSW Chief Judge at Common Law Andrew Bell explained that former NSW police constable Kristian White had made “an error of judgement”, when he tasered 95-year-old grandmother Clare Nowland at the Yallambee Lodge aged care facility in the NSW town of Cooma on 17 May 2023, which was an act that resulted in her death in hospital the following week.
And as staff were unsuccessful in deterring her, emergency services were called in at around 4 am, and on mention of the knives, police were automatically notified.
NSW police sergeant Jessica Pank and White then attended the scene just before 5 am. Pank and a paramedic attempted to talk Nowland into putting down the single knife she was then holding but the woman made no acknowledgement and commenced moving to door of the room in which she stood. The sergeant attempted to move in twice to disarm Nowland, but she’d raised the knife.
White then activated the warning arc of his taser at 5.09 am. Nowland stopped briefly in the doorway, prior to raising the knife again, which led White to remark, “Nah, bugger it,” and strike the great grandmother once in the chest and then in the abdomen with the device. She fell backwards and struck her head on the floor, with the resulting injuries causing death a week later.
Time in the community
After a seven day trial, a NSW Supreme Court jury found White guilty of manslaughter, contrary to section 18(1)(b) of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW). This offence carries up to 25 years imprisonment.
Manslaughter is the lesser charge for murder, which too is contained in section 18 of the Crimes Act. Manslaughter involves the unintentional or accidental killing of another person, while murder is committed intentionally.
The Crown put to the jury that White was guilty of either manslaughter by criminal negligence or unlawful and dangerous act. The former type of manslaughter carries a higher criminal culpability.
Manslaughter by criminal negligence requires three elements: the act causing death to be deliberate, unlawful and dangerous.
Manslaughter by unlawful and dangerous act requires six elements: a death having occurred, the deceased being owed a duty of care, the person owing the duty having committed the act that caused death, the duty, therefore, being neglected and punishment then being warranted.
NSW Chief Judge at Common Law Ian Harrison found on 28 March, that White had committed manslaughter, via an unlawful and dangerous act, as the force used was unnecessary, especially on a woman of Nowland’s age, and he added that the jury would have inferred that a reasonable person “would not have resorted to the use of a taser in the circumstances that confronted him”.
His Honour then imposed a 2 year community corrections order (CCO) upon the former NSW police officer, with standard conditions applying, plus a stipulation that he conduct 425 hours of community service work.
An unlawful and dangerous act
The prosecution appealed the manifest inadequacy of White’s sentence to the NSW Court of Criminal Appeal (NSWCCA) on 27 June 2025.
The Crown did so based on three grounds: that it was wrong to consider White held an ‘honest belief’ that the tasering was necessary, that finding the crime to be at the lower end of objective seriousness was in error and that determining ‘general deterrence’ played a minor factor in sentencing was also wrong.
NSW Chief Justice Bell confirmed in his 30 July 2025 final findings that the incident leading to Nowland’s death was an “egregious” “error of judgement” and a “‘terrible’ mistake on” White’s part. His Honour added that the Crown was clear during the trial that there was no suggestion that the NSW police constable had any “malevolent motivations” in tasering Nowland.
The NSW Chief Justice explained that manslaughter via unlawful and dangerous act does not involve any recklessness or disregard for consequences on the part of the offender, and neither does it reveal “gross negligence” or “any suggestion of malevolence”.
“Apart from not involving recklessness, this was not a case where the respondent intended to kill or seriously injure Mrs Nowland,” his Honour added. “Nor was it a case where the respondent was found to have acted out of anger or malice, revenge or retribution, envy or jealousy, avarice or greed.”
White’s act was considered unlawful, however, as NSW police are permitted, under section 230 of the Law Enforcement (Powers and Responsibilities) Act 2002 (NSW) (LEPRA), to only use such force as is reasonably required, and as Justice Bell pointed out, the use of the taser was considered “unreasonable or disproportionate and, therefore, unlawful force”.
And the act was dangerous because of Nowland’s vulnerability, due to her age, fragility and lack of mobility.
Not made out
In terms of the first ground of appeal, that the sentencing judge had been in error in finding that White had held an honest belief that tasering Nowland was necessary at the time, which his Honour did not find made out, as the constable was found to have made “an error of judgement” and in making a mistake, one has to be at least be honest in the act they were mistaken was legitimate.
Justice Bell further raised that Judge Harrison had made clear on sentencing that “White’s crime falls at the lower end of seriousness for crimes of its type”, and this had been “uncontroversial” at trial, as was the understanding that White’s crime did not constitute the “worst category of manslaughter”, which is by criminal negligence.
The second ground suggested that the finding of lower end objective seriousness was in error, which his Honour again found was not made out, as, even if White had “overestimated or misunderstood the nature and extent of the risk posed by Nowland”, he was still acting honestly, and this miscalculation doesn’t increase the seriousness of offending.
The third ground was that general deterrence played “only a minor role” in sentencing White.
General deterrence is a sentencing principle that involves the effect that the punishment that an offender receives has on other members of the community in terms of preventing them from considering committing a similar crime. So, in respect of general deterrence, a harsher sentence may go some way to deterring others from committing the same criminal offence.
His Honour found this ground too was not made out, as the people subject to the general deterrence stemming from White’s punishment are “police officers armed with and responsible for the use of weapons in their official duties, generally”. Yet, due to the high degree of attention given to this case, police officers are well aware of the dire consequences of such actions, which includes loss of job.
So, all three grounds of appeal failed.
The order of the day
NSW Chief Justice Bell ordered on 30 July 2025 that the Crown appeal suggesting the CCO imposed upon former NSW police constable Kristian White was manifestly inadequate was not made out and the original sentence imposed remained.
NSWCCA Justices Anthony Payne and Natalie Adams agreed with their colleague’s ruling.
