A sentencing judge may permissibly find that an offender's mental illness slightly lessens the need for general deterrence while simultaneously concluding that the same mental illness, combined with an entrenched pattern of recidivism, gives rise to a greater need for community protection that outweighs the favourable factor. The passage in Bugmy v The Queen regarding the difficulty of predicting future dangerousness over lengthy sentences does not preclude a sentencing judge from assessing the risk of reoffending; it remains part of the sentencing responsibility, albeit with a significant element of imprecision. Where experienced counsel at first instance expressly disavowed reliance on certain mitigating aspects of mental illness, the Court of Criminal Appeal will not lightly entertain those arguments on appeal.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 29 later cases that cite this judgment.
6 of the 29 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.