Unfitness to Plead Consultation Responses - Law Commission ...

then the Home Secretary, said that being unfit to plead was a postponement of a trial,
not a substitute for one.
Some of these cases resulted in acquittal. Could not the Court decide at the time of an
unfitness finding whether there is a public interest in bring the case back should
fitness be regained. (As an aside, you said in the paper that you were unsure why
only those given a restriction order are able to be remitted for trial in the legislation -
the reason given to me at the time was it was only these individuals whose
whereabouts would be known).
Finally, and though it may not strictly be part of the consultation's remit, but I think it
worth stating that a trial of a fit defendant is preferable to a Part 4A hearing of an unfit
one. Finding someone unfit should be at the end of the road, and effort should be
made to get an individual fit before going down this route. In my research I was
sometimes amazed at how quickly some lawyers and psychiatrists wanted to push the
defendant through the unfit to plead door.
Again, I think the Consultation Paper is excellent (and well written), and in that vein I
hope you find the above comments of interest.
Don Grubin