Unfitness to Plead Consultation Responses - Law Commission ...

Response to Consultation Paper on UNFITNESS TO PLEAD
(11) Do the matters raised in questions 8, 9 and 10 merit equal consideration in relation to the procedure in
the youth courts?
Yes. Youth is not just a chronological fact. Young people (as research for the last 15 years, though sadly none in this
Country) need more protection, not less. Research of Tom Grisso and his team has consistently shown that Adolescent
Adjudicative Capacity in youth are impaired by many factors of which the immaturity of youth is a major one. We
attach a recent paper by our Dr. Sarkar with an accompanying commentary by Professor Grisso which debates the
conceptual issues.
(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 a matter for the society to determine where they wish to fix the age of Criminal Responsibility. If our proposal is
accepted (i.e. The two stage trial process and assessment of capacity at first stage), it becomes irrelevant where the
line in the sand is. If capacity to consent to medical process is on a sliding scale of ‘Gillick’, so should be the Criminal
Responsibility. See our objection to a fixed line in sand (in Dr. Sarkar’s paper) and Prof Grisso’s answer. Also see the
conceptual objections by Psychologists on the famous APA Flip Flop (paper attached, Oct 2009 in American
Psychologist by Steinberg and colleagues). Needless to say this has not yet been validated by solid research and thus
needs proper examination.
END OF DOCUMENT
9