Unfitness to Plead Consultation Responses - Law Commission ...

The CP alludes to the problem that we have identified above that the
disposals available after a fact finding hearing may not be appropriate
and that a stay of proceedings is an avenue that may be pursued in the
Magistrates’ Courts in such cases. It may therefore be appropriate to
provide the court with discretion as to whether a fact-finding hearing is
appropriate.
10. If consultees think that there should be a mandatory fact-finding
procedure, do they think it should be limited to consideration of the external
elements of the offence or should it mirror our provisional proposals 8 and 9?
We consider it would be appropriate for the procedure to be essentially
the same in both jurisdictions.
11. Do the matters raised in questions 8, 9 and 10 merit equal consideration
in relation to the procedure in the youth courts?
Yes, however as already noted this would undoubtedly increase the
number of pre trial hearing in the youth courts as it is widely accepted
that mental health issues are far more common in young offenders.
12. How far if at all, does the age of criminal responsibility factor into the issue
of decision-making capacity in youth trials?
This is probably a question for the child psychiatrists to answer.
However, with the age of criminal responsibility being 10 years of age
there will be real issues to be considered as to the decision-making
capacity of very young defendants
Submitted by Gill Allison
District Judge (Magistrates’ Courts)
On behalf of the Legal Committee of District Judges (Magistrates’
Courts)
26 th January 2011
4