Louis Woodham: South Coast man on murder charge judged mentally unfit for trial

The man who allegedly stabbed a grandmother to death on the NSW South Coast six weeks after leaving prison for previous violent offending has been deemed unfit for trial.

A man has been judged too mentally unfit to stand trial for the alleged stabbing murder of a South Coast grandmother last year.

Louis Norman Woodham, 38, appeared in the NSW Supreme Court via AVL from Long Bay Hospital for a two-day mental health fitness inquiry which resulted in Justice Peter Hamill concluding he was unfit to stand trial for the murder of 51-year-old Denise Brameld.

Woodham was charged with the stabbing murder of Ms Brameld after her son found her body at her Comerong Island Rd property at Numbaa on the morning of Friday, June 11, 2021.

Woodham was arrested later that day and has remained in custody ever since.

On Monday, the court heard two psychiatrists, Dr Kerri Eagle and Dr Adam Martin, who had both seen Woodham in recent years with neither able to have “real certainty” whether he would be fit to stand trial at some stage.

Dr Eagle outlined that Woodham lacked the ability to read and write as well as reason and problem solve.

She said treatment through the drug Clozapine may improve “basic levels of concentration and emotional fluctuations”, but said it would be ”highly unlikely” that it would make him fit to stand trial.

Forensic police at Denise Brameld’s property on Comerong Island Rd at Numbaa. Picture: Madeline Crittenden

“Mr Woodham is unlikely to significantly improve in terms of functional cognitive ability to understand the court process, certain aspects of evidence and how evidence applies to him and his alleged offending,” Dr Eagle, who treated him in 2019, explained.

“Clozapine is the gold-standard, the best medication available for the treatment of schizophrenia, but unfortunately it is limited in its effectiveness at dealing with cognitive deficit, [however] there are no other better options than that.

“It‘s highly unlikely Mr Woodham would find his impairments that have contributed to his unfitness would resolve in 12 months to such an extent that would make him fit.

“‘Real certainty’ isn’t a psychiatric term, that’s a matter for that court, I don’t think there is real certainty in psychiatry.”

Dr Martin concurred with his colleague‘s assessment by adding “very few things in psychiatry have certainty”.

“It is something less than certainty, I don‘t think I can be certain,” he said.

“It‘s highly unlikely [treatment would see him become fit], but I can’t rule it out. I could not say in all honesty he couldn’t not become fit.”

Crown prosecutor Nerissa Keay revealed in her submissions that Woodham was arrested and convicted in 2018 for “very serious offences”.

These offences stemmed back to Australia Day of that year when Woodham broke into a Nowra abode before assaulting two men in the home and wounding a female police officer.

Ms Keay said she found it “difficult to understand” how Woodham was released from prison without treatment six weeks prior to the alleged murder.

Defence barrister Philip Young concurred with Ms Keay that the circumstances surrounding Woodham‘s release were “staggering”.

“When previously on a similar [medication] regime he did become fit, though it was described as borderline,” Mr Young told Justice Peter Hamill.

“He did come good, to use a euphemism, on the previous occasion. It‘s staggering what happened upon his release, but that’s history now, nothing can be done about it.”

Mother-of-two Denise Brameld was described in court as a “tragic and innocent victim”. Picture: Facebook

On Tuesday, Justice Hamill described Ms Brameld as being a “tragic and innocent victim” and passed on his condolences to her family with her two children tuning into proceedings online.

Justice Hamill called the circumstances around Woodham leaving prison last year “perplexing” before determining he didn‘t at this stage have the cognitive capacity to participate in a trial.

Justice Hamill said Wood was “unable to understand the difference between murder and manslaughter” and due to that ”lack of understanding he was unable to enter a sensible plea to the charge”.

Woodham‘s “gross lack of concentration” and ”basic understanding of the evidence against him”, the justice outlined, meant he ”wouldn’t be able to make a defence to the charge” or ”instruct his lawyers”.

The justice said Woodham had told Dr Eagle he “intended to plead guilty, but almost in the same breath he said he did not mean to kill Ms Brameld”.

It was concluded by Justice Hamill that Woodham would either “become fit to be tried in the next 12 months” or ”he will not become fit to be tried for the offence”, noting the accused‘s cognitive impairment was ”unlikely to ever improve” due to him being ”significantly resistive to treatment.

Justice Hamill ordered Woodham remain in custody and be referred to a mental health tribunal while also recommending he be assessed by an expert regarding the extent of his cognitive impairment.

A future court date wasn‘t listed with Justice Hamill urging both parties to “leave it as it is”.