The Allegation
 

Bilal Fadel was charged over the fatal stabbing of two of his close friends during an incident in New South Wales.
The prosecution alleged that he intentionally attacked the victims, inflicting fatal knife wounds, including a stab to the neck.

The Crown case relied on the fact that:

• two victims were stabbed during the same incident

• the attacks were deliberate and targeted

• the level of violence suggested intent to cause serious harm or death

​

The Reality of the Case

The central issue in the case was not whether Bilal Fadel committed the acts, but his mental state at the time.

Evidence before the Court established that:

• he was suffering from a severe schizophrenic episode

• his mental illness significantly impaired his perception of reality

• he was experiencing delusions at the time of the accused

• his actions were not carried out with a rational or stable state of mind

Psychiatric evidence indicated that his condition affected his ability to understand or control his actions.

​

Our Defence Strategy

The defence focused on the impact of mental illness on criminal responsibility.

Key elements included:

• presenting expert psychiatric evidence confirming schizophrenia

• establishing that he was in an acute psychotic state during the accused

• demonstrating that his actions were driven by delusions rather than intent

• arguing that he could not be held fully criminally responsible due to mental impairment

The defence aimed to show that the case was not one of calculated violence, but of severe mental health crisis.

​

The Court’s Findings

The Court accepted the psychiatric evidence and found that:

• Bilal Fadel was suffering a schizophrenic episode at the time of the stabbings

• his mental state significantly impaired his judgment and perception

• the attacks occurred in the context of acute mental illness

The findings recognised that his actions were closely linked to his psychiatric condition.

​

The Result

The Court’s decision reflected the role of mental illness in the offending, leading to:

• a finding acknowledging severe mental impairment

• a legal outcome shaped by psychiatric evidence rather than purely punitive considerations

​

Why This Case Matters

This case highlights a critical principle in criminal law:
Mental illness can fundamentally affect criminal responsibility.

It reinforces that:

• courts must carefully assess psychiatric evidence

• not all violent acts arise from rational intent

• the justice system must distinguish between criminal culpability and medical condition

​

Our Expertise

At Abbas & Co Lawyers, we act in serious criminal matters involving:

• homicide and violent offences

• mental health defences

• complex evidentiary cases

• appellate litigation

We know how to:

• work with leading psychiatric experts

• present nuanced mental health defences

• challenge assumptions about intent

• achieve outcomes that reflect the full context of a case

​

Speak to Us

If you or a loved one is facing serious criminal charges involving mental health issues, early legal advice is essential.

Strict time limits and complex legal thresholds apply.

Contact Abbas & Co Lawyers to discuss your options.