Law and Rights
In 1831, at the York assizes, a woman called Dyson stood trial for the murder of her illegitimate child by cutting off its head. The lady defendant was deaf and had never been able to speak. Even with the use of sign language she could not understand matters such as her right to challenge jurors. A jury found her "mute by visitation of God" and Parke J - (later Lord Wensleydale) - relied on the authority of Hale to require the jury to find her insane - R v Dyson (1831).
A few years later came the case of R v Pritchard (1836). Pritchard was also "deaf and dumb" and stood trial for what was then the capital offence of "bestiality." Alderson B (the trial judge) relied on R v Dyson and empanelled a jury to decide whether he was "mute of malice of by visitation of God." The jury found the latter and were then required to decide whether he could plead. They found that he could do so and he entered a not guilty plea. The jury were then directed to decide whether he was sane or not. Alderson B told the jury that the defendant could be regarded as sane if he had sufficient intellect to comprehend the course of the proceedings so as to make a proper defence; to know that he could challenge any juror to whom he objected and to comprehend details of the evidence.
The test in Pritchard received the approval of the Court of Criminal Appeal in R v Podola [1960] 1 QB 325 and the test remains the basis of the law although it is outdated and inconsistent with modern psychiatry.
Under modern law, the question of fitness to plead is decided by the judge: Criminal Procedure (Insanity) Act 1964 as amended by the Criminal Procedure (Insanity and Fitness to Plead) Act 1991 and the Domestic Violence, Crime and Victims Act 2004. The judge must have reports from two or more registered medical practitioners at least one whom must be approved under the Mental Health Act 1983 s.12. If it is decided that the defendant is unfit to plead then the court moves to the so-called "s4A hearing" to determine whether the defendant did the act or made the omission constituting the actus reus of the offence charged against him. If there is a finding that the defendant did the act then certain disposals are possible - e.g. a Hospital Order.
The Law Commission has been examining the whole subject of Fitness to Plead and their report is now open for consultation - Consultation Paper 197 "Unfitness to Plead" - published 27th October 2010. As ever, the document is a masterful and detailed survey of the present law and proposes comprehensive reform. Responses to the consultation have to be in by 27th January 2011. It should be noted that somewhat different rules apply in the Magistrates' Court - (see the Consultation Paper Part 8).
- Modernising The Rules On Unfitness To Plead
The Law Commission wishes to see new rules relating to Unfitness to Plead - a matter that became very topical when Lord Janner was prosecuted in 2015 for alleged sexual offences - (previous post). Janner died in late 2015. Law Commission - ...
- Lord Greville Janner Will Now Be Prosecuted
The Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) has reversed her earlier decision not to prosecute Lord Greville Janner on 22 counts of sexual offences allegedly committed against children - see the announcement by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS). ...
- Lord Greville Janner ~ The Decision Not To Prosecute
Lord Janner of Braunstone (aged 86) who suffers from dementia is not to be prosecuted for 22 alleged serious sexual offences. The reasons for this decision are set out in a statement issued by the Director of Public Prosecutions. Please read...
- Criminal Law ~ The Law Commission On Insanity And Automatism
Included in recent publications by the Law Commission are: (a) Discussion paper on Insanity and Automatism published 23 July 2013 and (b) Unfitness to Plead consultation responses published 10 April 2013. a) Insanity and Automatism: In July 2012, the...
- Nailed At Last .... Men Convicted At The First Non-jury Trial In The Crown Court
The four men - (Twomey, Blake, Hibberd and Cameron) - charged with a large-scale robbery committed at Heathrow in 2004 have been convicted by Mr Justice Treacy who heard the case without a jury. See Telegraph 31st March 2010 and the earlier post...
Law and Rights
Fitness to Plead
A few years later came the case of R v Pritchard (1836). Pritchard was also "deaf and dumb" and stood trial for what was then the capital offence of "bestiality." Alderson B (the trial judge) relied on R v Dyson and empanelled a jury to decide whether he was "mute of malice of by visitation of God." The jury found the latter and were then required to decide whether he could plead. They found that he could do so and he entered a not guilty plea. The jury were then directed to decide whether he was sane or not. Alderson B told the jury that the defendant could be regarded as sane if he had sufficient intellect to comprehend the course of the proceedings so as to make a proper defence; to know that he could challenge any juror to whom he objected and to comprehend details of the evidence.
The test in Pritchard received the approval of the Court of Criminal Appeal in R v Podola [1960] 1 QB 325 and the test remains the basis of the law although it is outdated and inconsistent with modern psychiatry.
Under modern law, the question of fitness to plead is decided by the judge: Criminal Procedure (Insanity) Act 1964 as amended by the Criminal Procedure (Insanity and Fitness to Plead) Act 1991 and the Domestic Violence, Crime and Victims Act 2004. The judge must have reports from two or more registered medical practitioners at least one whom must be approved under the Mental Health Act 1983 s.12. If it is decided that the defendant is unfit to plead then the court moves to the so-called "s4A hearing" to determine whether the defendant did the act or made the omission constituting the actus reus of the offence charged against him. If there is a finding that the defendant did the act then certain disposals are possible - e.g. a Hospital Order.
The Law Commission has been examining the whole subject of Fitness to Plead and their report is now open for consultation - Consultation Paper 197 "Unfitness to Plead" - published 27th October 2010. As ever, the document is a masterful and detailed survey of the present law and proposes comprehensive reform. Responses to the consultation have to be in by 27th January 2011. It should be noted that somewhat different rules apply in the Magistrates' Court - (see the Consultation Paper Part 8).
- Modernising The Rules On Unfitness To Plead
The Law Commission wishes to see new rules relating to Unfitness to Plead - a matter that became very topical when Lord Janner was prosecuted in 2015 for alleged sexual offences - (previous post). Janner died in late 2015. Law Commission - ...
- Lord Greville Janner Will Now Be Prosecuted
The Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) has reversed her earlier decision not to prosecute Lord Greville Janner on 22 counts of sexual offences allegedly committed against children - see the announcement by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS). ...
- Lord Greville Janner ~ The Decision Not To Prosecute
Lord Janner of Braunstone (aged 86) who suffers from dementia is not to be prosecuted for 22 alleged serious sexual offences. The reasons for this decision are set out in a statement issued by the Director of Public Prosecutions. Please read...
- Criminal Law ~ The Law Commission On Insanity And Automatism
Included in recent publications by the Law Commission are: (a) Discussion paper on Insanity and Automatism published 23 July 2013 and (b) Unfitness to Plead consultation responses published 10 April 2013. a) Insanity and Automatism: In July 2012, the...
- Nailed At Last .... Men Convicted At The First Non-jury Trial In The Crown Court
The four men - (Twomey, Blake, Hibberd and Cameron) - charged with a large-scale robbery committed at Heathrow in 2004 have been convicted by Mr Justice Treacy who heard the case without a jury. See Telegraph 31st March 2010 and the earlier post...