Ashton, R v

Where fresh psychiatric evidence, admitted in the interests of justice following a Criminal Cases Review Commission reference, establishes that an offender was suffering from an abnormality of mind which substantially diminished responsibility for a killing, a murder conviction cannot stand. The appropriate course is to quash that conviction and substitute manslaughter by reason of diminished responsibility.

Where the statutory conditions are satisfied, the court may make a hospital order and a restriction order without limit of time under the Mental Health Act.

The appellant was convicted of murder at Birmingham Crown Court after fatally stabbing Trevor Blackwood. His case at trial was self-defence or provocation. A first appeal against conviction was dismissed in June 1999.

Following a further application, the Criminal Cases Review Commission referred the conviction under section 9 of the Criminal Appeal Act 1995. The reference relied on fresh psychiatric evidence. Four consultant forensic psychiatrists addressed the appellant’s condition, and the evidence supported the conclusion that he had schizophrenia or paranoid schizophrenia at the time of the killing. The prosecution accepted that, if admitted, the evidence required substitution of a verdict of manslaughter by reason of diminished responsibility.

The court had to decide whether to receive the fresh evidence and, if so, the proper disposal of the appeal.

1. Appeal allowed. The court received the fresh psychiatric evidence because it was expedient in the interests of justice to do so. The evidence of all four doctors was admitted.
2. The psychiatric evidence established that the appellant suffered from schizophrenia or paranoid schizophrenia. The doctors who addressed his condition at the time of the killing considered that he then suffered from an abnormality of mind which diminished his responsibility. The evidence also explained why no psychiatric defence had been raised at trial: his illness impaired his ability to consider available defences and his assessment before trial had been inadequate.
3. In light of that evidence, and the Crown’s concession, the murder verdict was unsafe. The court quashed the murder conviction and substituted a verdict of manslaughter by reason of diminished responsibility.
4. The court was satisfied, on the further evidence of Dr Collins and the report of the responsible medical officer, that the conditions relevant to sections 37 and 41 of the Mental Health Act were met. It made a hospital order for treatment at Ashworth Hospital under the supervision of Dr Fearnley, and a restriction order without limit of time under section 41.

• Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) — On a Criminal Cases Review Commission reference under section 9 of the Criminal Appeal Act 1995, the court allowed the appeal, quashed the murder conviction, substituted manslaughter by reason of diminished responsibility, and made orders under sections 37 and 41 of the Mental Health Act: [2006] EWCA Crim 1267.
• Court of Appeal — The appellant’s first appeal against conviction was dismissed in June 1999. No citation is stated.
• Birmingham Crown Court — The appellant was convicted of murder on 2 November 1998 and sentenced to life imprisonment.