R v Pritchard
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 21 March 1836 |
| Date | 21 March 1836 |
| Court | Court of the King's Bench |
English Reports Citation: 173 E.R. 135
IN THE COURTS OF KING'S BENCH, COMMON PLEAS AND EXCHEQUER
Followed, R v Berry, 1876, 1 Q B D 447. Considered, R. v Harris, 1897, 61 J. P. 792; R v Governor of Stafford Prison, ex parte Emery, [1909] 2 K B. 81.
START 7 GAB. & P. 304. BEX V. PBITCHARD 135 March 21st, 1836. rex v pritchard. (A person, deaf and dumb, was to be tried for a capital felony the Judge ordered a jury to be impanneled, to try whether he was mute by the visitation of God , the jury found that he was so The jury were then sworn to try whether he was able to plead, which they found in the affirmative , and the prisoner, by a sign, pleaded-Not guilty The Judge then ordered the jury to be sworn to try whether the prisoner was " now sane or not " ; and on this question, his Lordship directed the jury to consider whether the prisoner had sufficient intellect to comprehend the course of the proceedings, so as to make a proper defence, to challenge any juror he might wish to object to, and to comprehend the details of the evidence , and that if they thought he had not, they should find him not of sane mind. The jury did so , and the Judge ordered the prisoner to be detained under the stat 39 & 40 Geo III. c 94, s 2.) [Followed, R v Berry, 1876, I Q B D 447. Considered, R. v Harris, 1897, 61 J. P. 792; R v Governor of Stafford Prison, ex parte Emery, [1909J 2 K B. 81.J The prisoner was indicted for bestiality.--He was deaf and dumb, and did not plead to the indictment . whereupon a j ury was immediately impanneled to determine whether the prisoner was mute of malice, or by the visitation of God [304] Evidence was offered to shew that he was deaf and dumb , and the jury found that he was mute by the visitation of God The jury were sworn to inquire whether the prisoner was able to plead to the indictment It was proved that the prisoner was able to lead and write, he having been taught in the Deaf and Dumb Asylum in London. The indictment was given to him, which he read, and he made a sign that he was not guilty The jury then found that he was able to plead They were then sworn to determine, whether the prisoner were now sane or not Evidence was given with a view of shewing, that, on the examination before the magistrates, he had understood the charge, and answered in writing It was however sworn by several witnesses that the prisoner was nearly an idiot, and haxl no proper understanding and that though lie might be able to be...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
R v Weekes (Stephen)
...on that basis. We are not persuaded that a rigid application of the test of fitness to plead as formulated by Alderson B 150 years ago in R v Pritchard (1836) 7 C&P 303 and accepted by the courts ever since is necessarily and in all cases the conclusive answer to the question whether new ev......
-
DPP (Murphy) v PT
...[1994] 3 I.R. 246, applied. Rex v. DysonENR 7 C.& P. 305n; Rex v. Governor of Stafford PrisonELR [1909] 2 K.B. 81; Rex v. PritchardENR 7 C.& P. 303; The Queen v. BerryELR (1876) 1 Q.B.D. 447, followed. 2. That the Board was a guardian of the accused under s. 131 of the Children Act, 1908 an......
-
R v Berry
...questions put to witnesses called to give evidence upon the issue of the defendant's disability are based upon the test enunciated in R. v. Pritchard (reported in 1836 7C & P, 303) and deal with whether the defendant has sufficient intellect to instruct his solicitor and counsel, to plead ......
-
R v Robertson
...test which is always referred to in these cases and which has been confirmed and followed over and over again is to be found in the case of Pritchard (7 Carrington &Payne's Eeports at page 303) in which Baron Alderson, in dealing with a deaf-mute, said this to the Jury: "There are three poi......
-
The interpretation and application of the right to effective participation
...n. 26 at [18]; CPS vP[2007] EWHC 946 (Admin) at [51].62. See n. 47. The original test of fitness to plead is set out in RvPritchard (1836) 7 C & P 303.63. RvM (John), n. 47 at [20].Owusu-Bempah implicit in the right to effective participation, despite the lack of clarity as to what it entai......
-
Table of Cases
...R v Pollard, [2007] OJ No 615 (Ct J) ......................................................................... 141, 211 R v Pritchard (1836), 7 Car & P 303, 173 ER 135 ...........6, 21, 47, 51, 52, 74, 185, 186, 217, 219 R v Proctor, [1993] MJ No 525 (QB) .........................................
-
Unfitness to Plead and the Overlap with Doli Incapax: An Examination of the Law Commission's Proposals for a New Capacity Test
...test of lack of decision-35 As has been seen above, her Ladyship opined obiter that the defence of doli incapaxcontinued to exist.36 (1836) 7 C & P 303.37 (2004) 40 EHRR 121.38 In accordance with Art. 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights.39 [2005] EWHC 2583 (Admin).40 Ibid. at [7].4......
-
Unfitness to stand trial and the indefinite detention of persons with cognitive disabilities in Australia: human rights challenges and proposals for change.
...4(1), pt 2; Criminal Law (Mentally Impaired Accused) Act 1996 (WA) pt 3. (35) [1958] VR 45, 48 (Smith J). (36) (1836) 7 C & P 303, 304; 173 ER 135, 135 (Alderson (37) Kesavarajah v The Queen (1994) 181 CLR 230, 245 (Mason CJ, Toohey and Gaudron JJ). (38) Crimes Act 1900 (ACT) s 311; Cri......