- Page 1 and 2: Unfitness to Plead Consultation Res
- Page 3 and 4: CONSULTEES, LISTED ALPHABETICALLY A
- Page 5 and 6: Sarkar, Sameer Searle, Geoff Sense
- Page 7 and 8: o The UN Committee on the Rights of
- Page 9 and 10: Rethinking the Criminal Responsibil
- Page 11 and 12: asic competencies of young people a
- Page 13 and 14: parliament to consider rather than
- Page 15 and 16: preventing crime. Graham and Bowlin
- Page 17 and 18: other areas of the law’ and this
- Page 19 and 20: absolute minimum age of criminal re
- Page 21 and 22: The views of the judiciary in the U
- Page 23 and 24: all children who are alleged to hav
- Page 25 and 26: 39 Trevor Jones‘Public Opinion, P
- Page 27 and 28: Charity No 1137430 Company No 60065
- Page 29 and 30: Charity No 1137430 Company No 60065
- Page 31 and 32: From: Bickle Andrew Sent: 10 Januar
- Page 33 and 34: Comments on “Unfitness to Plead,
- Page 35 and 36: 8. It would be very easy to insert
- Page 37 and 38: himself at trial. The Court did not
- Page 39: -----Original Message----- From: Br
- Page 43 and 44: for the task in hand. This would ap
- Page 45 and 46: 1. Introduction “UNFITNESS TO PLE
- Page 47 and 48: On the other hand, the so-called co
- Page 49 and 50: The Law Commissioners, Steel House,
- Page 51 and 52: Law Commission consultation on unfi
- Page 53 and 54: could possibly mean that they take
- Page 55 and 56: whether present at the time of the
- Page 57 and 58: disposals. We consider that the ref
- Page 59 and 60: difficulties may or may not be fit
- Page 61 and 62: profession to treatment, the civil
- Page 63 and 64: of the decision the accused must ma
- Page 65 and 66: 25. We consider that Provisional Pr
- Page 67 and 68: Provisional Proposal 5: Decision-ma
- Page 69 and 70: giving evidence, it is unlikely tha
- Page 71 and 72: Provisional Proposal 7: A defined p
- Page 73 and 74: 42. The difficulty lies in that the
- Page 75 and 76: envisages that there could be an ac
- Page 77 and 78: Reply 50. We consider we have alrea
- Page 79 and 80: Question 6: Are there circumstances
- Page 81 and 82: uilds upon the disposal of the case
- Page 83 and 84: determination of jurisdiction as ap
- Page 85 and 86: age” in which term we include the
- Page 87 and 88: The assumption that has been made i
- Page 89 and 90: which the court is satisfied that t
- Page 91 and 92:
The current section 4A procedure re
- Page 93 and 94:
The CPS then re-reviews the case in
- Page 95 and 96:
cases, there should be a single tri
- Page 97 and 98:
magistrates/District Judges, keepin
- Page 99 and 100:
Law Commission Consultation paper N
- Page 101 and 102:
From: Enys Delmage Sent: 16 March 2
- Page 103 and 104:
for meaningful participation in the
- Page 105 and 106:
(7) A defined psychiatric test to a
- Page 107 and 108:
(13) In the event of a referral bac
- Page 109 and 110:
[Paragraph 6.153] N/A (5) Should a
- Page 111:
[Paragraph 8.68] YES (12) How far i
- Page 114 and 115:
Question 1: Do consultees agree tha
- Page 116 and 117:
Question 3: Do consultees agree tha
- Page 118 and 119:
Question 5: Should a jury be able t
- Page 120 and 121:
Question 7: Should an accused who i
- Page 122 and 123:
Question 9: Do consultees think tha
- Page 124 and 125:
Question 11 Do the matters raised i
- Page 126 and 127:
Summary of comments regarding propo
- Page 128 and 129:
4. Antoine probably reflects a reas
- Page 130 and 131:
succeed in doing so, but at the cos
- Page 132 and 133:
kept in a shared wardrobe at the ho
- Page 134 and 135:
acquittal save those arising from a
- Page 136 and 137:
From: Ernest Gralton Sent: 14 Decem
- Page 138 and 139:
then the Home Secretary, said that
- Page 140 and 141:
Law Commission Consultation Paper N
- Page 142 and 143:
Provisional Proposals 6 and 7 There
- Page 144 and 145:
Dear David, HHJ Wendy R. Joseph QC
- Page 146 and 147:
I totally agree that the test must
- Page 148 and 149:
Just for Kids Law: Response to the
- Page 150 and 151:
We agree with this approach for a r
- Page 152 and 153:
Provisional Proposal 6: Where a def
- Page 154 and 155:
Article 6 protection would also giv
- Page 156 and 157:
Question 6: Are there circumstances
- Page 158 and 159:
judges, politicians, advocates, and
- Page 160 and 161:
Appendix One GRISSO CRITERIA Thomas
- Page 162 and 163:
Justices’ Clerks’ Society Law C
- Page 164 and 165:
measures might have a beneficial im
- Page 166 and 167:
Question 3: Do consultees agree tha
- Page 168 and 169:
Question 9: Do consultees think tha
- Page 170 and 171:
Response to the Law Commission Cons
- Page 172 and 173:
liberating and immensely challengin
- Page 174 and 175:
However it is where these two areas
- Page 176 and 177:
Pearson was detained for three mont
- Page 178 and 179:
wholly agree with, focuses predomin
- Page 180 and 181:
Whilst this is a submission in rela
- Page 182 and 183:
SECTION 1 : KC RESPONSE TO PROVISIO
- Page 184 and 185:
Provisional Proposal 3: The legal t
- Page 186 and 187:
Provisional Proposal 5: Decision-ma
- Page 188 and 189:
that the defendant’s capacity is
- Page 190 and 191:
Question 2: Can consultees think of
- Page 192 and 193:
Provisional Proposal 8: The present
- Page 194 and 195:
Option 4 which looks at reform to m
- Page 196 and 197:
Question 5: Should a jury be able t
- Page 198 and 199:
Please note the exploitative scenar
- Page 200 and 201:
out in Crown, magistrate and youth
- Page 202 and 203:
In the case studies of Mr Y and Mr
- Page 204 and 205:
APPENDIX I Case Study: Mr A [This c
- Page 206 and 207:
unwell. Mr A was being seen every c
- Page 208 and 209:
APPENDIX II Case study: Mr Z [This
- Page 210 and 211:
sensitively. A lawyer was obtained
- Page 212 and 213:
elease accompanied by a nurse. Kids
- Page 214 and 215:
At this time, Mr O ceased engaging
- Page 216 and 217:
APPENDIX V MIND: STATICTICS: FACTSH
- Page 218 and 219:
per 100,000 in the general populati
- Page 220 and 221:
Prisoners and the Mental Health Act
- Page 222 and 223:
RESPONSE TO LAW COMMISSION CONSULTA
- Page 224 and 225:
3 Admission for treatment. (1) A pa
- Page 226 and 227:
(8) Do consultees think that the ca
- Page 228 and 229:
UNFITNESS TO PLEAD Response by the
- Page 230 and 231:
UNFITNESS TO PLEAD Response by the
- Page 232 and 233:
Example 3E UNFITNESS TO PLEAD Respo
- Page 234 and 235:
UNFITNESS TO PLEAD Response by the
- Page 236 and 237:
UNFITNESS TO PLEAD Response by the
- Page 238 and 239:
UNFITNESS TO PLEAD Response by the
- Page 240 and 241:
UNFITNESS TO PLEAD Response by the
- Page 242 and 243:
UNFITNESS TO PLEAD Response by the
- Page 244 and 245:
UNFITNESS TO PLEAD Response by the
- Page 246 and 247:
UNFITNESS TO PLEAD Response by the
- Page 248 and 249:
UNFITNESS TO PLEAD Response by the
- Page 250 and 251:
UNFITNESS TO PLEAD Response by the
- Page 252 and 253:
UNFITNESS TO PLEAD Response by the
- Page 254 and 255:
UNFITNESS TO PLEAD Response by the
- Page 256 and 257:
UNFITNESS TO PLEAD Response by the
- Page 258 and 259:
UNFITNESS TO PLEAD Response by the
- Page 260 and 261:
UNFITNESS TO PLEAD Response by the
- Page 262 and 263:
UNFITNESS TO PLEAD Response by the
- Page 264 and 265:
UNFITNESS TO PLEAD Response by the
- Page 266 and 267:
UNFITNESS TO PLEAD Response by the
- Page 268 and 269:
UNFITNESS TO PLEAD Response by the
- Page 270 and 271:
UNFITNESS TO PLEAD Response by the
- Page 272 and 273:
UNFITNESS TO PLEAD Response by the
- Page 274 and 275:
Law Commission consultation paper n
- Page 276 and 277:
(1) understand the charges (2) be c
- Page 278 and 279:
Further, given that some clinicians
- Page 280 and 281:
In addition to the above proposals,
- Page 282 and 283:
that defendants with mental health
- Page 284 and 285:
Response to the Consultation Paper
- Page 286 and 287:
We consider that the concerns about
- Page 294 and 295:
Unfitness to plead - Some Responses
- Page 296 and 297:
or made the omission charged and th
- Page 298 and 299:
(6) Are there circumstances in whic
- Page 300 and 301:
statistics. In 2008 there were 484
- Page 302 and 303:
LAW COMMISSION CONSULTATION: UNFITN
- Page 304 and 305:
Our Comments We are not criminal pr
- Page 306 and 307:
4. We have been asked to suggest or
- Page 308 and 309:
particular tool should necessarily
- Page 310 and 311:
My comments refer to the recent Con
- Page 312 and 313:
NATIONAL BENCH CHAIRMEN’S FORUM A
- Page 314 and 315:
National Bench Chairmen’s Forum T
- Page 316 and 317:
RESPONSE TO THE LAW COMMISSION’S
- Page 318 and 319:
There is a real danger in conflatin
- Page 320:
physical strength and sexual awaken
- Page 324 and 325:
The group felt that many experts’
- Page 326 and 327:
Tel: Fitzwilliam College Fax: Cambr
- Page 328 and 329:
Unfitness to Plead: the place to fi
- Page 330 and 331:
court proceedings” (at para 149).
- Page 332 and 333:
processes, and, indeed, on the comp
- Page 334 and 335:
of the European Court of Human Righ
- Page 336 and 337:
Law Commission Steel House 11 Tothi
- Page 338 and 339:
obligations, it would be much easie
- Page 340 and 341:
Response to the Law Commission’s
- Page 342 and 343:
fit to plead, the availability and
- Page 344 and 345:
disability) there should be a power
- Page 346 and 347:
Disposal under the Mental Health Ac
- Page 348 and 349:
I agree. There should be a test of
- Page 350 and 351:
Gray, N.S., O’Connor, C., William
- Page 352 and 353:
On the Friday, the day before she w
- Page 354 and 355:
The following Thursday at The Black
- Page 356 and 357:
Cases involving the learning disabl
- Page 358 and 359:
Graham Rogers and Associates Limite
- Page 360 and 361:
In this case, it is being proposed
- Page 362 and 363:
Being able to ‘read’ The Sun or
- Page 364 and 365:
test, it may also begin to indicate
- Page 366 and 367:
subjected to the new provisions mus
- Page 368 and 369:
introduction, more than ten times t
- Page 370 and 371:
Response to Consultation paper 197,
- Page 372 and 373:
emand have significant personal cos
- Page 374 and 375:
Where possible an individual should
- Page 376 and 377:
epetition of evidence or the provis
- Page 378 and 379:
months, and are unlikely to refer b
- Page 380 and 381:
Question 12: How far if at all, doe
- Page 382 and 383:
Consultation Proposals Provisional
- Page 384 and 385:
agreement on the primary issue enga
- Page 386 and 387:
It would of course be concerning if
- Page 388 and 389:
witnesses who are commissioned to u
- Page 390 and 391:
PO BOX 3544 Wokingham, RG40 9FA T 0
- Page 392 and 393:
Response to Consultation Paper on U
- Page 394 and 395:
Response to Consultation Paper on U
- Page 396 and 397:
Response to Consultation Paper on U
- Page 398 and 399:
Response to Consultation Paper on U
- Page 400 and 401:
Unfitness to Plead Sense Response P
- Page 402 and 403:
- Congenitally deafblind children a
- Page 404 and 405:
The deafblind population has been s
- Page 406 and 407:
take up to 15 minutes to read a sho
- Page 408 and 409:
For example - A deafblind person C
- Page 410 and 411:
- Allowing the deafblind person to
- Page 412 and 413:
RESPONSE TO THE LAW COMMISSION CONS
- Page 414 and 415:
g. However, In some circumstances,
- Page 416 and 417:
QUESTION 9 Do consultees think that
- Page 418 and 419:
Obviously the judge should be guide
- Page 420:
Question 7: Should an accused who i
- Page 423 and 424:
problems which arose in B & others
- Page 425 and 426:
Page 4 of 4
- Page 427 and 428:
1. Introduction Victim Support is t
- Page 429 and 430:
In our view, a general difficulty w
- Page 431 and 432:
We are in support of this provision
- Page 433 and 434:
Question 1: Do consultees agree tha
- Page 435 and 436:
Preliminary Comments Dr Eileen Viza
- Page 437 and 438:
3 ‘developmental immaturity’ co
- Page 439 and 440:
PART 9 LIST OF PROVISIONAL PROPOSAL
- Page 441 and 442:
7 (9) If the accused is acquitted p
- Page 443 and 444:
9 (9) Do consultees think that if a
- Page 445:
11 Other References All Party Parli