Accepting/Rejecting Unchallenged Expert Evidence: The Decision-Making Prerogative: R v Charlene Sargeant [2019] EWCA Crim 1088
| Date | 01 February 2020 |
| Author | Kyriakos N. Kotsoglou |
| DOI | 10.1177/0022018320904907 |
| Published date | 01 February 2020 |
| Subject Matter | Case Notes |
The Journal of Criminal Law
2020, Vol. 84(1) 86–89
Accepting/Rejecting Unchallenged
ª The Author(s) 2020
Article reuse guidelines:
Expert Evidence: The
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/0022018320904907
Decision-Making Prerogative
journals.sagepub.com/home/clj
R v Charlene Sargeant [2019] EWCA Crim 1088
Keywords
Expert witness testimony, unchallenged evidence, accepting evidence, decision-making
prerogative
In 2018, the appellant was convicted of murder of her mother. She appealed against conviction by
leave of the single judge. The appellant and the deceased lived together in Staffordshire. According
to an agreed summary chronology, created from Social Services and Housing Association records
and from medical records for both the appellant and the deceased, the latter had psychiatric
problems which had manifested in aggression and violence. The deceased suffered from psychosis
and had a history of self-harming. This behaviour had a negative effect on the appellant who was
exposed to all of this and on two occasions was referred to mental health agencies. Social Services
staff had expressed concerns about the effect that the deceased’s condition was having on the
appellant.
Shortly after 9 am on 16th March 2018, the appellant called the emergency services. Although she
initially said that the deceased had committed suicide (the deceased had a knife in her right hand and had
multiple stab wounds to her neck), upon her arrest the appellant confessed killing her mother. She told
the police: ‘She drove me to it. I killed her’ (at [5]). In a prepared statement, the appellant said that she
had been physically, mentally and sexually abused by her mother from the age of 16.
At trial, the appellant gave evidence in her defence. The night before the incident they had argued
about bills, which was usually the case. The deceased had taken a pair of scissors from the drawer and
she had picked up a knife. The appellant tried to hug the deceased and had tried to cut her. She felt
emotionally at breaking point. The argument continued and she ‘did the final stab to her when [the
appellant] lost control of the knife’ (at [14]).
There was various medical evidence before the Crown Court. One psychiatrist found that the appel-
lant had presented with symptoms of an adjustment reaction disorder due to her current situation which
were exacerbated by more persistent depressive disorder from her social circumstances and past abuse.
Another expert said that the appellant had traits of ongoing depressive and self-defeating personality.
The expert witness who gave oral evidence confirmed that the appellant was suffering from autistic
spectrum disorder. She had long-standing difficulties in communication, difficulties in social interaction
and difficulties in coping with stress. She may have been more prone to acting impulsively and had a
mild intellectual disability. The situation was like a ‘powder keg’ likely to go off at any time. In his
opinion, the appellant was suffering from an abnormality of mental functioning that arose from a
recognised medical condition. It could have had a substantial impairment on her ability to make a
rational decision and could have impaired her ability to exercise rational control.
Case Note
87
The prosecution case was that on this...
To continue reading
Request your trial