A sentencing judge cannot reject unchallenged expert psychological evidence of an offender's intellectual disability on the basis of generalisations about psychologists ameliorating offenders' conduct or by comparing the offender to a generic category of young irresponsible drivers. The principles in R v Israil concerning the relevance of mental illness to sentencing (moral culpability, general and specific deterrence, hardship of imprisonment) apply equally to intellectual disability, though the weight given to each factor will vary depending on the nature and severity of the disability. Where intellectual disability is established and causally linked to offending, it must be taken into account as reducing moral culpability.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 3 later cases that cite this judgment.
1 of the 3 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.