A trial judge conducting a special hearing is entitled to reject psychiatric evidence supporting the partial defence of substantial impairment where the psychiatrists were not provided with critical evidence (particularly ERISPs and lay witness statements) and where other evidence, including the accused's presentation in ERISPs conducted close to the time of the offence, provides a rational basis for a different conclusion. ERISPs conducted within days of the offence may provide more reliable evidence of an accused's mental state than psychiatric consultations conducted months later. Legal representatives should ensure forensic psychiatrists are provided with audio-visual records of interview.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 9 later cases that cite this judgment.
4 of the 9 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.