Criminal

Defendant charged with murder unfit to plead - defence of diminished responsibility not available on hearing as to whether defendant did act charged - mens rea not relevantR v Antoine: HL (Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead, Lord Mackay of Clashfern, Lord Nolan, Lord Hope of Craighead and Lord Hutton): 30 March 2000

The defendant, charged with murder and manslaughter, was found by the jury under s4(5) of the Criminal Procedure (Insanity) Act 1964 (as substituted by s2 of the Criminal Procedure (Insanity and Unfitness to Plead) Act 1991), to be under disability so as to be unfit to be tried.Before a different jury determined, under s4A, whether he had done the act charged as the offence, the judge ruled that the defence of diminished responsibility was not available in respect of the charge of murder.

The jury found that the defendant had done the act of murder, and the judge ordered his admission to hospital, his discharge to be restricted without limit of time.

The Court of Appeal [1999] Gazette, 26 May; [1999] 3 WLR 1204 dismissed his appeal.

He appealed.David Spens QC and Gareth Branston (instructed by Kaim Todner) for the defendant.

James Curtis QC and Nicholas Hilliard (instructed by Crown Prosecution Service, Southwark) for the Crown.Held, dismissing the appeal, that where a jury under s4(5) of the 1964 Act had found that the accused was under disability and unfit to stand trial, he was no longer liable to be convicted of murder and accordingly the defence of diminished responsibility under s2 of the Homicide Act 1957 could not be raised at the hearing under s4A(2); and that, in view of the word 'act' rather than 'offence' in s4A(2), the jury was not concerned with any mental element in the doing of the act charged.

(WLR)