Crimes Mental Impairment consultation paper.pdf - Victorian Law ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

B Appendix B: Jurisdictional comparison of mental impairment definitions Jurisdiction Legislation Definition s 7.3(1) – A person is not criminally responsible for an offence if, at the time of carrying out the conduct constituting the offence, the person was suffering from a mental impairment that had the effect that: Commonwealth Criminal Code ACT 1995 (Cth) a) the person did not know the nature and quality of the conduct; or b) the person did not know that the conduct was wrong (that is, the person could not reason with a moderate degree of sense and composure about whether the conduct, as perceived by reasonable people, was wrong); or c) the person was unable to control the conduct. s 7.3(8) – mental impairment includes senility, intellectual disability, mental illness, brain damage and severe personality disorder. s 7.3(9) – mental illness is a reference to an underlying pathological infirmity of the mind, whether of long or short duration and whether permanent or temporary, but does not include a condition that results from the reaction of a healthy mind to extraordinary external stimuli. However, such a condition may be evidence of a mental illness if it involves some abnormality and is prone to recur. ‘mentally ill’ s 38(1) – If, in an indictment or information, an act or omission is charged against a person as an offence and it is given in evidence on the trial of the person for the offence that the person was mentally ill, so as not to be responsible, according to law, for his or her action at the time when the act was done or omission made, then, if it appears to the jury before which the person is tried that the person did the act or made the omission charged, but was mentally ill at the time when the person did or made the same, the jury must return a special verdict that the accused person is not guilty because of mental illness. New South Wales Mental Health (Forensic Provisions) Act 1990 (NSW) 215
Victorian Law Reform Commission Review of the Crimes (Mental Impairment and Unfitness to be Tried) Act 1997: Consultation Paper 216 Jurisdiction Legislation Definition ‘mental disease’ or ‘natural mental infirmity’ Queensland Criminal Code 1988 (Qld) s 27(1) – A person is not criminally responsible for an act or omission if at the time of doing the act or making the omission the person is in such a state of mental disease or natural mental infirmity as to deprive the person of capacity to understand what the person is doing, or of capacity to control the person’s actions, or of capacity to know that the person ought not to do the act or make the omission. s 27(2) – A person whose mind, at the time of the person’s doing or omitting to do an act, is affected by delusions on some specific matter or matters, but who is not otherwise entitled to the benefit of subsection (1), is criminally responsible for the act or omission to the same extent as if the real state of things had been such as the person was induced by the delusions to believe to exist. ‘mental disease’ includes ‘natural imbecility’ Tasmania Criminal Code 1924 (Tas) s 16(1) – A person is not criminally responsible for an act done or an omission made by him when afflicted with mental disease to such an extent as to render him incapable of understanding the physical character of such act or omission, or knowing that such act or omission was one which he ought not to do or make, or when such act or omission was done or made under an impulse which, by reason of mental disease, he was in substance deprived of any power to resist. s 16(2) – The fact that a person was, at the time at which he is alleged to have done an act or made an omission, incapable of controlling his conduct generally, is relevant to the question whether he did such act or made such omission under an impulse which by reason of mental disease he was in substance deprived of any power to resist. s 16(3) – A person whose mind at the time of his doing an act or making an omission is affected by a delusion on some specific matter, but who is not otherwise exempted from criminal responsibility under the foregoing provisions of this section, is criminally responsible for the act or omission to the same extent as if the fact which he was induced by such delusion to believe to exist really existed.
Page 1 and 2:
Review of the Crimes (Mental Impair
Page 3 and 4:
Published by the Victorian Law Refo
Page 5 and 6:
Victorian Law Reform Commission Rev
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
xviii
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 30 and 31:
2 The CMIA: background and principl
Page 32 and 33:
2 2.6 For the vast majority of peop
Page 34 and 35:
2 2.16 Prior to these reviews, the
Page 36 and 37:
2 Previous reviews of provisions in
Page 38 and 39:
2 Victorian Parliament Law Reform C
Page 40 and 41:
2 criminal law, 44 and is also reco
Page 42 and 43:
2 Protection of the community 2.62
Page 44 and 45:
2 Family members of people subject
Page 46 and 47:
2 2.94 The CMIA’s therapeutic aim
Page 48 and 49:
2 Principles governing the treatmen
Page 50:
2 Victorian law Mental Health Act 1
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 72 and 73:
4 Unfitness to stand trial 52 Intro
Page 74 and 75:
4 4.5 As stated in [4.11] below, un
Page 76 and 77:
4 4.16 If an accused person is foun
Page 78 and 79:
4 The test in Victoria: the ‘Pres
Page 80 and 81:
4 Decision-making capacity or effec
Page 82 and 83:
4 Question 3 Should the test for un
Page 84 and 85:
4 or rational appreciation of the p
Page 86 and 87:
4 4.57 However, expressly recognisi
Page 88 and 89:
4 4.65 Some jurisdictions have legi
Page 90 and 91:
4 Difficulty in assessing unfitness
Page 92 and 93:
4 Requirement to ‘plead’ in a c
Page 94 and 95:
4 The role of experts in the proces
Page 96 and 97:
4 4.102 More broadly, some have que
Page 98 and 99:
4 4.113 In DPP v CJC (CJC), 135 Jus
Page 100 and 101:
4 4.121 The Law Reform Committee re
Page 102 and 103:
4 Directions to the jury on finding
Page 104:
4 4.141 It is unclear why appeals a
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
112
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151 and 152:
Page 153 and 154:
Page 155 and 156:
134
Page 157 and 158:
Page 159 and 160:
Page 161 and 162:
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165 and 166:
Page 167 and 168:
Page 169 and 170:
Page 171 and 172:
Page 173 and 174:
Page 175 and 176:
Page 177 and 178:
Page 179 and 180:
158
Page 181 and 182:
Page 183 and 184:
Page 185 and 186: Victorian Law Reform Commission Rev
Page 205 and 206: 184
Page 235: Victorian Law Reform Commission Rev
Page 241 and 242: 220
Page 251: Victorian Law Reform Commission Rev
show all

Crimes Mental Impairment consultation paper.pdf - Victorian Law ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?