Diminished Responsibility: Psychological Injury
| Date | 01 February 2007 |
| DOI | 10.1350/jcla.2007.71.1.16 |
| Author | Emily Finch |
| Published date | 01 February 2007 |
| Subject Matter | Northern Ireland Court of Appeal |
Diminished Responsibility: Psychological Injury
R v McQuade [2005] NICA 2
After listening to a radio programme about paedophilia, the defendant
sought out and attacked his uncle who had sexually abused him when
he was eight years old. The defendant inflicted eight stab wounds and
caused incisions to his uncle’s neck, shoulder, chest, back, hand and
fingers, causing his death. The defendant then went to the police station,
handed them the knife with which he inflicted the injuries and calmly
confessed to what he had done.
At trial, the defendant’s plea of diminished responsibility was rejected
and he was sentenced to life imprisonment for murder. His appeal
against conviction raised two issues relating to the defence of diminished
responsibility.
The first issue was whether the reversal of the legal burden in relation
to diminished responsibility created by s. 5(3) of the Criminal Justice Act
(Northern Ireland) 1966 (which is equivalent to s. 2(1) of the Homicide
Act 1957) was compatible with Article 6 of the European Convention on
Human Rights guaranteeing the right to a fair trial.
The second issue concerned the statutory definition of diminished
responsibility; in particular, whether an ‘abnormality of mind’ which is
‘induced by diseased or injury’ was limited to abnormality arising from
physical injury or whether it also encompassed abnormalities arising
from psychological injury.
HELD, ALLOWING THE APPEAL AND ORDERING A RETRIAL:
1. The reversed burden of proof created by s. 5(3) of the Criminal
Justice Act (Northern Ireland) 1966 does not infringe Article 6(2)
of the European Convention.
2. A mental abnormality caused by psychological injury could be
within the scope of diminished responsibility and this issue should
have been left to the jury for determination.
COMMENTARY
Section 5(1) of the Criminal Justice Act (Northern Ireland) 1966 pro-
vides that diminished responsibility can be relied upon as a defence to
murder if it is established that the defendant was suffering from a mental
abnormality. A ‘mental abnormality’ is defined in s. 1 of the 1966 Act as:
An abnormality of mind which arises from a condition of arrested or
retarded development of mind or any inherent causes or is induced by
disease or injury.
The essence of the defence is the same as that found in s. 2(1) of the
Homicide Act 1957, thus the issues determined in this case are of
relevance to the application and interpretation of the defence of dimin-
ished responsibility within England and Wales.
16
Diminished Responsibility: Psychological Injury
There was no question in this case that the defendant was suffering
from an abnormality of mind; expert witnesses for the prosecution and
defence were agreed that the defendant was suffering from a severe
personality disorder that was capable of amounting to an abnormality of
mind. The issue concerned whether or not the...
To continue reading
Request your trial