An inconsistency in an expert report that is ultimately immaterial to the sentencing judge's reasoning does not give rise to a miscarriage of sentencing proceedings, even where the applicant's legal representatives failed to detect it. A sentencing judge is entitled to refuse an adjournment where the issue sought to be clarified is not material to the sentence and finality is in the interests of victims. Expert evidence that a mental condition is merely 'one possible reason' for offending conduct is insufficient to establish a mitigating causal connection on the balance of probabilities.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 4 later cases that cite this judgment.
3 of the 4 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.