Where uncontradicted expert psychiatric evidence supports a defence of unsoundness of mind under s 27 of the Criminal Code (WA), a trial judge (or jury) cannot reject that evidence unless there are facts or circumstances that displace or cast doubt upon it. The forensic evidence of what an accused did during the commission of the offence, and the accused's retrospective cross-examination answers about their state of mind, are insufficient to reject compelling uncontradicted psychiatric opinion where the expert has explained why such evidence is consistent with the psychotic state and why retrospective accounts are unreliable.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 64 later cases that cite this judgment.
10 of the 64 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.