A sentencing judge is not obliged to accept a psychologist's opinion that an offender's mental health condition was causally connected to offending, particularly where the offender's history given to the psychologist is largely uncorroborated and the nature of the offending is characterised as purposeful and deliberate rather than the product of unregulated emotional response. The absence of a causal connection between mental illness and offending does not preclude some moderation of the weight given to general and specific deterrence; the sentencing judge may find deterrence remains relevant without treating the two matters as mutually exclusive.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 3 later cases that cite this judgment.
2 of the 3 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.