Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel. Click here to request a subscription.
Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel.
Click here to request a subscription.
Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel. Click here to request a subscription.
or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments |
The Supreme Court dismissed an appeal from the Central Criminal Court, affirming the decision that a serious assault charge against an individual deemed unfit to plead should remain. The accused, who had been voluntarily confined to a mental treatment center, was initially charged with causing serious harm after stabbing a fellow patient, who later died. The murder charge was dismissed due to a lack of causation, leaving the serious harm charge in place. The Supreme Court agreed with the lower court's decision that if the accused becomes fit to be tried, the criminal process will resume. The original decision was made by the Central Criminal Court, which found the accused unfit to plead and allowed the serious harm charge to stand.
Supreme Court, serious assault charge, mental treatment center, unfit to plead, causation, murder charge, Central Criminal Court, Criminal Law (Insanity) Act 2006, Criminal Law (Insanity) Act 2010, habeas corpus, appeal, statutory definitions, common law, diminished responsibility, fitness to plead, insanity defense, public policy, criminal liability, actus reus, mens rea, Criminal Justice (Theft and Fraud Offences) Act 2001.
Note: This is intended to be a fair and accurate report of a decision made public by a court of law. Any errors should be notified to the editor and will be dealt with accordingly.
Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel.
Click here to request a subscription.