Episode 4: The Son Who Killed His Mother – The William Foran Case

Episode 4 of True Crime Tasmania examines the tragic death of 77-year-old Margaret Nicol Foran at her Launceston home in April 2012 and the extraordinary case of her son, William Foran, who killed his mother while experiencing an acute psychotic episode.

When a family member discovered Margaret’s body at her home on 23 April 2012, police were confronted with what initially appeared to be a straightforward homicide investigation. Her son, William John Foran, was charged with murder. But when the case eventually reached the Supreme Court of Tasmania, there was little dispute about who had caused Margaret’s death. Instead, the central issue was William’s state of mind and whether he was legally responsible for what he had done. The jury ultimately found that William had committed the act that caused his mother’s death but was not guilty by reason of insanity. Behind the legal arguments, psychiatric evidence and unusual verdict was a family tragedy: a 77-year-old mother of seven had lost her life at the hands of her own son.

Who Was Margaret Foran?

Margaret Nicol Foran was born on 5 January 1935. By 2012 she was 77 years old, widowed and the mother of seven children. Margaret had lived in her unit at Alanvale Road in Launceston for approximately 18 years. She was retired and received a disability pension. Her son William did not normally live permanently with her, but had stayed at the unit intermittently over the years. Approximately two weeks before Margaret’s death, William returned to stay with his mother. Within days, their lives would become the centre of a homicide investigation.

Who Was William Foran?

William John Christopher McFardzean Foran was 52 years old when he returned to stay with his mother in April 2012. His life had previously been very different from the circumstances in which police would eventually encounter him in Tasmania. William was intelligent and had worked professionally in information technology. His background included senior employment overseas, including work associated with Microsoft. But by the time he was staying with Margaret in Launceston, William was experiencing serious mental health problems. Those problems would ultimately become central to understanding both what happened inside Margaret’s home and why a jury later found William not criminally responsible for her death.

The Last Known Contact With Margaret

On the evening of Sunday, 22 April 2012, Margaret spoke on the telephone with one of her daughters. The call occurred at approximately 7:46 pm. It became an important point in the subsequent investigation because it helped establish that Margaret was alive that evening. By the following morning, she was dead. The official investigation ultimately concluded that Margaret died sometime between that telephone conversation and approximately 9:45 am on Monday, 23 April.

The Discovery at Alanvale Road

A family member went to Margaret’s home on 23 April and discovered her body. Police and emergency services were called. It soon became apparent that Margaret’s death was not from natural causes.  The investigation focused on William, who had been staying with his mother. Police arrested him and he was subsequently charged with murder.

How Did Margaret Foran Die?

The forensic investigation established that Margaret died from asphyxia. The evidence showed that she had been manually strangled and smothered. The Tasmanian Coroner would later formally find that Margaret died as a result of those actions by her son while he was suffering from an acute psychotic episode. Unlike cases in which police must identify an unknown offender, the central question in the Foran case soon became something different. What was William’s mental state when he killed his mother? And was he legally responsible for his actions?

William Foran Is Charged With Murder

William was charged with murdering Margaret. In May 2012, he formally pleaded not guilty. The case proceeded towards trial in the Supreme Court of Tasmania in Launceston. By the time the matter came before a jury, William’s defence was not based upon a claim that someone else had killed Margaret. Instead, he pleaded not guilty on the grounds of insanity. This meant the jury had to consider a very particular legal question.

What Does “Not Guilty by Reason of Insanity” Mean?

The expression can easily be misunderstood. A verdict of not guilty by reason of insanity does not necessarily mean the jury believes the accused did not perform the physical act. Instead, the issue concerns the person’s legal responsibility at the time the act occurred. The law recognises that in certain circumstances a person’s mental condition can be so severely impaired that they cannot be held criminally responsible in the ordinary way. It is also important to distinguish the legal concept of insanity from mental illness generally. Having a psychiatric illness does not automatically make someone legally insane. The legal test is much narrower and relates to the person’s mental condition at the time of the alleged offence. In William’s case, psychiatric evidence became crucial.

The Supreme Court Trial

William’s trial took place in the Supreme Court in Launceston in March 2013. The court heard that William had been diagnosed with psychosis. The jury was required to consider both the physical acts that caused Margaret’s death and the psychiatric evidence concerning William’s mental condition. After hearing the evidence, the jury retired to consider its verdict. It took approximately an hour and a half. The jurors concluded that William had committed the act of killing his mother but was not criminally responsible because he was insane at the time. William Foran was therefore found not guilty of murder on the grounds of insanity.

A Verdict That Can Be Difficult to Understand

Cases involving the insanity defence can be difficult for the public — and particularly for the families involved — because the language used by the criminal justice system can sound contradictory. How can someone kill another person and still be found “not guilty”? The answer lies in the distinction between committing an act and being legally responsible for it. The jury accepted that William killed Margaret. What it did not accept was that he could be held criminally responsible for the killing in the same way as a person who was legally sane at the time. That did not mean William simply walked out of court.

What Happened to William Foran?

Following the verdict, William was admitted to the Wilfred Lopes Centre, Tasmania’s secure mental health facility. His future was then subject to psychiatric assessment and further consideration by the court. This illustrates another misconception surrounding the insanity defence. A person found not guilty by reason of insanity is not necessarily released into the community. Depending upon the circumstances and continuing risk, they can instead be detained and treated within a secure psychiatric environment. In William’s case, the verdict shifted the state’s response from conventional criminal punishment towards secure psychiatric treatment and risk management.

The Coroner’s Investigation

Margaret’s death was subsequently investigated by the Tasmanian Coroner. The coronial investigation drew upon a substantial body of material, including police and witness statements, William’s police interview, medical records, psychiatric reports, forensic evidence and material from the Supreme Court proceedings. The Coroner ultimately made a clear formal finding about what happened. Margaret died as a result of manual strangulation and smothering by William while he was experiencing an acute psychotic episode. Her medical cause of death was asphyxia. These findings are particularly valuable when revisiting the case because they provide an official account based upon the evidence gathered by police, medical specialists and the courts.

Mental Illness and Criminal Responsibility

The Foran case raises difficult questions about the intersection between serious mental illness and criminal law. When someone experiencing psychosis commits a violent act, the justice system must consider more than simply what happened. It must also ask whether that person understood what they were doing and whether they could legally be held responsible for their actions. That does not make the consequences any less real. Margaret lost her life. Her children lost their mother. William’s siblings had to confront the extraordinary reality that their brother had caused her death. At the same time, the evidence presented to the court indicated that William was experiencing a severe disturbance in his mental state. Those two realities exist alongside one another.

A Family on Both Sides of a Homicide

One of the particularly difficult aspects of matricide and other killings within families is that conventional ideas of “the victim’s family” and “the offender’s family” can break down. Margaret was the mother of seven children. William was one of those children. For Margaret’s other children, the person responsible for their mother’s death was also their brother. That creates an extraordinarily complicated form of grief. Family members can be left dealing simultaneously with the loss of someone they loved, the actions of another person they love and the knowledge that severe mental illness played a role in what occurred. The criminal proceedings may answer legal questions, but they cannot resolve those emotional consequences.

Remembering Margaret Foran

As with many homicide cases, there is a risk that the offender becomes better known than the victim. The unusual circumstances of William’s defence, his professional background and the insanity verdict naturally attracted public attention. But this case began with Margaret. She was 77 years old, a widow, a mother of seven and had lived in her Launceston home for almost two decades. On the evening before her death, she was doing something completely ordinary — speaking with one of her daughters on the telephone. By the following morning, her life had ended violently inside her own home. Whatever legal complexities followed, Margaret and the impact of her death upon her family should remain at the centre of the story.

Why the William Foran Case Is Significant

The case provides a powerful example of how Tasmania’s criminal justice system deals with a homicide committed during severe mental illness. It also demonstrates the difference between establishing that someone caused another person’s death and establishing that they are criminally responsible for it. William’s trial did not end with a conventional murder conviction or acquittal. The jury’s verdict acknowledged both realities: William committed the act that killed Margaret, but his mental condition meant he was not legally responsible for murder. That distinction is central to understanding the case.

Inside Episode 4 of True Crime Tasmania

In The Man Who Killed His Mother, Hamish and Emily examine the circumstances surrounding Margaret Foran’s death and the unusual criminal proceedings that followed, including:

• Margaret Foran and her life in Launceston;
• William Foran’s background and professional career;
• his return to stay with his mother shortly before her death;
• Margaret’s final known telephone conversation;
• the discovery of her body on 23 April 2012;
• the police investigation and William’s arrest;
• the forensic evidence concerning Margaret’s death;
• William’s diagnosis of psychosis;
• his Supreme Court trial in Launceston;
• the legal meaning of the insanity defence;
• the jury’s finding that William killed Margaret but was not guilty by reason of insanity;
• his admission to Tasmania’s secure mental health system; and
• the subsequent findings of the Tasmanian Coroner.

We also discuss the difficult questions the case raises about mental illness, criminal responsibility and what happens to a family when the person who causes a loved one’s death is another member of that same family.

Listen to Episode 4 – The Man Who Killed His Mother

Episode 4 of True Crime Tasmania examines the death of Margaret Foran and the case of her son William — a homicide in which there was little doubt about who caused the death, but profound questions about criminal responsibility. Join Hamish and Emily as they examine the investigation, psychiatric evidence, Supreme Court proceedings and the human story behind one of Tasmania’s more unusual murder cases.

About True Crime Tasmania

True Crime Tasmania is an independent podcast exploring murders, disappearances, mysteries and significant criminal cases from Tasmania’s past and present. We take a conversational approach while aiming to distinguish documented facts, court findings, allegations and speculation. Our episodes draw upon publicly available court decisions, coronial findings, historical reporting and other documentary sources. True crime involves real people. While investigations and legal questions are an important part of these stories, we aim to remember the victims and the impact these events had upon their families and communities.