Fresh psychiatric evidence obtained after sentencing that would have supported a delusional belief negating mens rea (claim of right) cannot be used to controvert the jury's verdict, but may be relied upon to establish a mental disorder falling short of mental impairment that satisfies the [name withheld] conditions, thereby reducing moral culpability and the weight of general deterrence. The case illustrates the importance of obtaining comprehensive collateral history for psychiatric assessments in cases involving potential delusional disorders, which are notoriously difficult to diagnose.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 7 later cases that cite this judgment.
1 of the 7 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.