M A N I F E S T M A D N E S S This is an open access version of the publication distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial- NoDerivs licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/), which permits non-commercial reproduction and distribution of the work, in any medium, provided the original work is not altered or transformed in any way, and that the work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact academic.permissions@oup.com This page intentionally left blank This is an open access version of the publication distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial- NoDerivs licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/), which permits non-commercial reproduction and distribution of the work, in any medium, provided the original work is not altered or transformed in any way, and that the work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact academic.permissions@oup.com Manifest Madness Mental Incapacity in Criminal Law A R L I E L O U G H N A N 1 This is an open access version of the publication distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial- NoDerivs licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/), which permits non-commercial reproduction and distribution of the work, in any medium, provided the original work is not altered or transformed in any way, and that the work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact academic.permissions@oup.com 3 Great Clarendon Street, Oxford, OX2 6DP, United Kingdom Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University ’ s objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide. Oxford is a registered trade mark of Oxford University Press in the UK and in certain other countries # A. Loughnan 2012 The moral rights of the author have been asserted First Edition published in 2012 Impression: 1 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the prior permission in writing of Oxford University Press, or as expressly permitted by law, by licence or under terms agreed with the appropriate reprographics rights organization. Enquiries concerning reproduction outside the scope of the above should be sent to the Rights Department, Oxford University Press, at the address above You must not circulate this work in any other form and you must impose this same condition on any acquirer Crown copyright material is reproduced under Class Licence Number C01P0000148 with the pemission of OPSI and the Queen ’ s Printer for Scotland British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data Data available Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Library of Congress Control Number 2012932677 ISBN 978 – 0 – 19 – 969859 – 2 Printed in Great Britain on acid-free paper by CPI Group (UK) Ltd, Croydon, CR0 4YY Links to third party websites are provided by Oxford in good faith and for information only. Oxford disclaims any responsibility for the materials contained in any third party website referenced in this work. This is an open access version of the publication distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial- NoDerivs licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/), which permits non-commercial reproduction and distribution of the work, in any medium, provided the original work is not altered or transformed in any way, and that the work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact academic.permissions@oup.com For my family, with love. This is an open access version of the publication distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial- NoDerivs licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/), which permits non-commercial reproduction and distribution of the work, in any medium, provided the original work is not altered or transformed in any way, and that the work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact academic.permissions@oup.com This page intentionally left blank This is an open access version of the publication distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial- NoDerivs licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/), which permits non-commercial reproduction and distribution of the work, in any medium, provided the original work is not altered or transformed in any way, and that the work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact academic.permissions@oup.com General Editor ’ s Preface In this monograph Arlie Loughnan examines the criminal law ’ s response to what she terms ‘ mental incapacity ’ . This takes her beyond a study of the ‘ defence of insanity ’ to consider a wider range of doctrines including infancy and intoxication, infanticide and diminished responsibility. Drawing on historical research and on legal theory, the author challenges various orthodoxies in criminal law scholarship, and reconceptualizes the relationship between the criminal law and forms of mental incapacity. The book casts new light on established topics, and does so at a time when law reform agencies in this country and elsewhere are turning their attentions to this part of the criminal law. This monograph should therefore be an important resource both for legal scholarship and for law reformers. Andrew Ashworth This is an open access version of the publication distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial- NoDerivs licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/), which permits non-commercial reproduction and distribution of the work, in any medium, provided the original work is not altered or transformed in any way, and that the work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact academic.permissions@oup.com This page intentionally left blank This is an open access version of the publication distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial- NoDerivs licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/), which permits non-commercial reproduction and distribution of the work, in any medium, provided the original work is not altered or transformed in any way, and that the work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact academic.permissions@oup.com Acknowledgements This book has been several years in the formation. It is based on a doctoral thesis, completed at the London School of Economics. I am deeply indebted to my supervisors, Nicola Lacey and Jill Peay, for their invaluable guidance, support and encouragement. I would also like to thank the examiners of the thesis, Lindsay Farmer and Alan Norrie, whose helpful comments and suggestions greatly assisted me in the process of writing this book. Parts of this book were written while I held a Visiting Fellowship in the Law Department, LSE, on sabbatical from the Faculty of Law, University of Sydney. During this visit, I was able to present some of the thoughts that are contained in this book to various audiences, and I bene fi ted from the discussions that ensued. I would like to thank Martin Loughlin and Neil Duxbury for making that visit possible and Emmanuel Melissaris, Mike Redmayne, and Charlie Webb for fruitful conversations on the topic of mental incapacity and crime. I am grateful to Thomas Crofts, Jesse Elvin, Nicola Lacey, and Kevin Walton, who generously gave their time to read parts of this book, and who provided valuable feedback on draft chapters. I would like to thank Graeme Coss, Mark Findlay, Tanya Mitchell, Michelle Momdjian, and Julie Stubbs for the support they gave me while I was working on this project. I would also like to thank Adriana Edmeades and Katherine Connolly for their assistance in preparing the manuscript for publication. A special thank you is reserved for Sabine Selchow, with whom I have had many stimulating discussions, and whose encouragement and intellectual companionship played a vital role in this project. The editorial team at Oxford University Press, including Alex Flach, Natasha Flemming, and Sally Pelling-Deeves, has been a pleasure to work with, and I appreciate the team ’ s efforts on this book. Helpful comments and suggestions came from the three referees consulted by OUP. I would like to express my gratitude to them and to Andrew Ashworth for the General Editor ’ s Preface. Parts of this book draw from the following articles: ‘“ Manifest Madness ” : Towards a New Understanding of the Insanity Defence ’ (2007) 70(3) Modern Law Review 379; ‘“ In a Kind of Mad Way ” : A Historical Perspective on Evidence and Proof of Mental Incapacity ’ (2011) 35(3) Melbourne University Law Review 1047; and ‘ Putting Mental Incapacity Together Again ’ (2012) 15(1) New Criminal Law Review 1. I thank the editors and publishers of these journals for allowing me to reuse the materials. Arlie Loughnan University of Sydney, January 2012 This is an open access version of the publication distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial- NoDerivs licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/), which permits non-commercial reproduction and distribution of the work, in any medium, provided the original work is not altered or transformed in any way, and that the work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact academic.permissions@oup.com This page intentionally left blank This is an open access version of the publication distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial- NoDerivs licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/), which permits non-commercial reproduction and distribution of the work, in any medium, provided the original work is not altered or transformed in any way, and that the work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact academic.permissions@oup.com Contents Table of Cases xv Table of Old Bailey Proceedings xix Table of Legislation xxi List of Abbreviations xxiii P AR T I 1. The Terrain of Mental Incapacity in Criminal Law 3 Why Examine Mental Incapacity? 3 Carving Out a Useful Approach to Mental Incapacity in Criminal Law 7 Overview of the Book 12 2. Putting Mental Incapacity Together Again 16 Reconstructing Mental Incapacity in Criminal Law 17 The Category of Mental Incapacity Doctrines in Criminal Law 26 Difference within Criminal Law 34 3. ‘ Manifest Madness ’ : The Intersection of ‘ Madness ’ and Crime 39 The Terrain of Mental Incapacity in Criminal Law 40 The Ontology of ‘ Madness ’ at the Point of Intersection with Crime 49 The Epistemology of ‘ Madness ’ at the Point of Intersection with Crime 57 PART I I 4. Dynamics of Inclusion and Exclusion: Un fi tness to Plead and Infancy 67 Informal Legal Practices and the Emergence of the Doctrines 68 Formalization of Un fi tness to Plead and Infancy I: Dangerousness and Disposal 75 Formalization of Un fi tness to Plead and Infancy II: Fairness and Special Treatment 81 Formalization of Un fi tness to Plead and Infancy III: the Rise of a Dynamic of Exclusion 92 5. Incapacity and Disability: the Exculpatory Doctrines of Insanity and Automatism 103 Of Unsound Minds and Wild Beasts: Insanity before M ’ Naghten 104 The Cleaving Apart of Insanity and Automatism 109 This is an open access version of the publication distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial- NoDerivs licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/), which permits non-commercial reproduction and distribution of the work, in any medium, provided the original work is not altered or transformed in any way, and that the work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact academic.permissions@oup.com A ‘ fi erce and fearful delusion ’ : Daniel M ’ Naghten and the Creation of the M ’ Naghten Rules 113 Insanity As We Know It: the M ’ Naghten Rules 116 The Appearance of a Discrete Automatism Doctrine and the Rise of Disability as a Basis for Insanity 122 The Persistence of Incapacity: the Requirements of the Doctrine of Automatism 125 On the Eve of Reform? 133 6. Knowing and Proving Exculpatory Mental Incapacity 136 The Naturalization of ‘ Madness ’ and the Role of Common Knowledge of ‘ Madness ’ 137 ‘ As a medical man, I have no hesitation in saying so ’ : Expert Knowledges of ‘ Madness ’ 143 ‘ I have seen a great many insane persons, and I should put him down as such ’ : the Signi fi cance of Prudential Knowledge and the Ongoing Role of Lay Knowledge 150 Knowing More Than They Can Say: Experts (and Non-Experts) in the Current Era 155 Proving Exculpatory ‘ Madness ’ : Reconstruction and Due Process 159 PART III 7. ‘ Since the days of Noah ’ : the Law of Intoxicated Offending 173 The Emergence of an Informal Intoxication Plea 174 ‘ The nature of her mania was madness from drink ’ : the Development of Expertise on Intoxication 178 The Formalization of the Law of Intoxicated Offending 181 The Apogee of Formalization?: DPP v Majewski 186 Beyond the Bounds of Majewski : Amoral Intoxication 191 Lay Knowledge of Intoxication in Criminal Law 195 The Janus-face of the Law of Intoxicated Offending 198 8. Gender, ‘ Madness ’ , and Crime: the Doctrine of Infanticide 202 Proscribing Infanticide: ‘ Lewd Women ’ and ‘ Bastard ’ Children 203 ‘ Out of her usual senses ’ : Infanticide and Incapacity 209 Liability, Responsibility, and the ‘ Infanticidal ’ type 214 Of Imbalance and Disturbance: the Current Law of Infanticide 216 ‘ [T]his sad case ’ : What Legal Actors Know about Infanticide 221 9. Differences of Degree and Differences of Kind: Diminished Responsibility 226 ‘ Without being insane in the legal sense ’ : the Development of Diminished Responsibility in Scotland 227 xii Contents This is an open access version of the publication distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial- NoDerivs licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/), which permits non-commercial reproduction and distribution of the work, in any medium, provided the original work is not altered or transformed in any way, and that the work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact academic.permissions@oup.com ‘ In the light of modern knowledge ’ : the Introduction of Diminished Responsibility in England and Wales 232 The Current Doctrine of Diminished Responsibility 235 Professional Actors and Expert Knowledge: Deciding Diminished Responsibility 245 The Difference Diminished Responsibility Makes 253 Bibliography 259 Index 275 Contents xiii This is an open access version of the publication distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial- NoDerivs licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/), which permits non-commercial reproduction and distribution of the work, in any medium, provided the original work is not altered or transformed in any way, and that the work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact academic.permissions@oup.com This page intentionally left blank This is an open access version of the publication distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial- NoDerivs licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/), which permits non-commercial reproduction and distribution of the work, in any medium, provided the original work is not altered or transformed in any way, and that the work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact academic.permissions@oup.com Table of Cases All cases are from England and Wales unless otherwise speci fi ed. A v DPP [1997] 1 Cr App R 27 ................................................................................................90 – 1 Attorney-General for Jersey v Holley [2005] 2 AC 580....................... 23, 28, 194, 246, 253, 257 – 8 Attorney-General for Northern Ireland v Gallagher [1963] AC 349 .....................................118, 185 Attorney-General's Reference (No 2 of 1992) [1994] QB 91 .......................................................126 Attorney-General's Reference (No 3 of 1998) [2000] QB 401 ...................................................95 – 6 Beverley's Case (1603) 4 Co Rep 123; (1550) 1 Plowd 1.............................................................174 Bratty v Attorney-General for Northern Ireland [1963] AC 386 .. 5, 26 – 7, 118 – 19, 127 – 31, 156 – 8, 160 – 3, 185, 196, 217, 247 Broome v Perkins (1987) 85 Cr App R 321.................................................................126, 132, 161 C (A Minor) Appellant v DPP [1996] AC 1 ............................................... 30, 68, 78, 88 – 90, 92 – 3 C v DPP [1994] 3 WLR 888.....................................................................................................92 – 3 Carraher v HM Advocate 1946 JC 108 (Scotland).......................................................................231 CC (A Minor) v DPP [1996] 1 Cr App R 375 ..............................................................................78 Crown Court at Maidstone ex parte London Borough of Harrow [2000] 1 Cr App R 117..........158 DPP v Beard [1920] 1 AC 479 ................................. 43, 118, 122, 174 – 5, 182 – 3, 185 – 6, 190, 194 DPP v Camplin [1978] AC 705.............................................................................................30, 256 DPP v H [1997] 1 WLR 1406 ............................................................................................121, 134 DPP v Majewski [1977] AC 443 ................................ 31, 131, 183, 185 – 91, 193 – 4, 196, 199 – 200 DPP v Morgan [1976] AC 182....................................................................................................187 DPP v Newbury [1977] AC 500..................................................................................................190 DPP v P [2008] 1 WLR 1005 .................................................................................................90, 93 Galbraith v HM Advocate (No 2) 2002 JC 1 (Scotland)..............................................................231 Governor of Stafford Prison, ex parte Emery [1909] 2 KB 81 ........................................................81 Habib Ghulam [2010] 1 WLR 891 ...............................................................................................87 Hill v Baxter [1958] 1 QB 277 ......................................................... 27, 119, 128, 131, 157, 163 – 4 HM v McLean (1876) 3 Couper 334 ....................................................................................229 – 30 HM Advocate v Dingwall (1867) 5 Irv 466 ...........................................................................229 – 30 HM Advocate v Savage 1923 SLT 659 (Scotland) ...................................................................231 – 2 JM (A Minor) v Runeckles (1984) 79 Cr App R 255.................................................................90 – 1 Kennedy v HM Advocate (1944) JC 171 (Scotland) ....................................................................196 L (A Minor) v DPP [1996] 2 Cr App R 501..................................................................................91 M'Naghten ’ s case (1843) 10 Cl & Fin 200......8, 22, 42 – 3, 54, 74, 113 – 17, 120 – 4, 129, 145, 147, 161, 164 – 5, 169, 185, 188, 226, 238, 241 Moyle v R [2008] EWCA Crim 3059..........................................................................................102 Queen v Berry (1876) 1 QBD 447 ..........................................................................................83, 99 This is an open access version of the publication distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial- NoDerivs licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/), which permits non-commercial reproduction and distribution of the work, in any medium, provided the original work is not altered or transformed in any way, and that the work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact academic.permissions@oup.com Queen v O'Connor [1980] 146 CLR 64 (Australia) ....................................................................196 Queen v Shickle [2005] EWCA Crim 1881.................................................................................245 R v Ahluwalia (1993) 96 [2003] 1 AC 1209................................................................................236 R v Allen [1988] Crim LR 698 ....................................................................................................192 R v Antoine [2001] 1 AC 340 .............................................................................................95 – 6, 99 R v Arnold ’ s case (1724) 16 St Tr 695.........................................................................106, 113, 141 R v B, W, S, H and W [2009] 1 Cr App R 261 ............................................................................97 R v Bailey [1983] 1 WLR 760 .................................................................................132, 190, 193 – 4 R v Benyon [1957] 2 QB 111........................................................................................................83 R v Bingham [1991] Crim LR 433 ..........................................................................................128 – 9 R v Bree [2008] QB 131..............................................................................................................192 R v Budd [1962] Crim LR 49..............................................................................................128, 161 R v Burgess [1991] 2 QB 92..................................................................................118 – 19, 130, 161 R v Burles [1970] 2 WLR 597.......................................................................................................99 R v Burns (1973) 58 Cr App R 364.....................................................................................163, 190 R v Byrne [1960] 2 QB 396 ................................................. 28, 117, 123, 146, 236 – 8, 240 – 1, 248 R v Caldwell [1982] AC 341................................................................................................188, 190 R v Campbell (1987) 84 Cr App R 255...................................................................................245 – 6 R v Campbell [1997] Crim LR 495 .............................................................................................234 R v Carr-Briant [1943] KB 607 ...................................................................................................163 R v Chard (1971) 56 Cr App R 268 ............................................................................................157 R v Charlson [1955] 1 WLR 317.................................................................................127, 163, 167 R v Clarke (1972) 56 Cr App R 225............................................................................................117 R v Codère (1916) 12 Cr App R 21.........................................................................................120 – 1 R v Coulburn (1988) 87 Cr App R 309...................................................................................78, 90 R v Cox [1968] 1 WLR 308 ............................................................................................158, 247 – 8 R v Davies (1853) 3 C & K 328....................................................................................................82 R v Davies [1913] 1 KB 573........................................................................................................122 R v Davis (1881) 14 Cox CC 563 .......................................................................................185, 194 R v Diamond [2008] EWCA Crim 923.......................................................................................245 R v Dietschmann [2003] 1 AC 1209 ...........................................................................236, 239, 243 R v Dix (1982) 74 Cr App R 306 ................................................................................................249 R v Dunbar [1958] 1 QB 1 .........................................................................................................246 R v Durante [1972] 3 All ER 962................................................................................................190 R v Eatch [1980] Crim LR 650 ...........................................................................................190, 192 R v Egan [1992] 4 All ER 470 ...........................................................................................95 – 6, 243 R v Erskine; Williams [2010] 1 WLR 183 ...............................................................................244 – 5 R v Felstead [1914] AC 534.........................................................................................................111 R v Ferrers (1760) 19 St Tr 885 ............................................................................................74, 141 R v Friend [1997] 1 WLR 1433 ....................................................................................................99 R v Gore (Lisa Therese) (Deceased) [2007] EWCA Crim 2789 .............................................28, 218 R v Gorrie (1918) 83 JP 136 .........................................................................................................90 R v Graddock [1981] Current L Ybk 476 ....................................................................................236 R v Graham [1982] 1 All ER 801 ..................................................................................................22 R v Grant [1960] Crim LR 424 ...........................................................................................162, 246 R v Grant [2002] QB 1030 ...........................................................................................85, 96 – 7, 99 R v Grindley (1819) 1 C & M 8..............................................................................................182 – 3 R v H [2003] UKHL 1 ............................................................................................... 61, 83, 86, 97 R v Had fi eld (1800) 27 St Tr 1281 ...............................................................................75, 109, 113 R v Hale, The Times, 22 July 1936 .............................................................................................217 R v Hardie (1985) 80 Cr App R 157 .............................................................. 131, 188, 193 – 4, 199 R v Harrison-Owen [1951] 2 All ER 726 ........................................................... 103, 126, 158, 163 xvi Table of Cases This is an open access version of the publication distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial- NoDerivs licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/), which permits non-commercial reproduction and distribution of the work, in any medium, provided the original work is not altered or transformed in any way, and that the work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact academic.permissions@oup.com R v Hasan [2005] 2 Cr App R 22 ..................................................................................................22 R v Heard [2007] 3 WLR 475.....................................................................................183, 188, 190 R v Hennessy [1989] 1 WLR 287..................................................................... 5, 118, 126, 129 – 30 R v Hobson [1998] 1 Cr App R 31 .............................................................................................236 R v Holman (Unreported) CA, 27 April 1994 ...............................................................................99 R v Holmes [1953] 2 All ER 324.................................................................................................157 R v Horseferry Road Magistrates, ex parte K [1997] QB 23.....................................................133 – 4 R v Inseal (CA, 10 May 1991) .....................................................................................................195 R v Ireland (1910) 9 Cr App R 139 .............................................................................................111 R v Isitt (1978) 67 Cr App R 44..........................................................................................126, 132 R v James; R v Karimi [2006] 1 Cr App R 440......................................................................23, 258 R v Jennion [1962] 1 WLR 317 ..................................................................................................248 R v JTB [2009] 2 Cr App R 500 .............................................................................................74, 93 R v Kai-Whitewind (Chaha'oh Niyol) [2005] 2 Cr App R 457........................................211, 221 – 2 R v Kemp [1957] 1 QB 399 ..................................................................................117 – 18, 128, 162 R v Kershaw (1902) 18 TLR 357.............................................................................................78, 90 R v Khan (Dawood) [2010] 1 Cr App R 74.................................................................................248 R v Kingston [1995] 2 AC 355................................................................................................192 – 3 R v Kooken (1982) 74 Cr App R 30............................................................................................246 R v Kopsch (1925) 19 Cr App Rep 50.........................................................................................123 R v Lambert [2002] QB 1112......................................................................................................164 R v Latus [2006] EWCA Crim 3187 ...........................................................................................245 R v Lawrence [1981] 2 WLR 524 ........................................................................................173, 197 R v Lewis (1989) 11 Cr App R (S) 577....................................................................................224 – 5 R v Lincoln (Kesteven) Justices, ex parte O'Connor [1983] 1 WLR 335 .......................................87 R v Lipman [1970] 1 QB 152 .............................................................................................131, 193 R v Lloyd [1967] 1 QB 175.........................................................................................................241 R v M [2003] EWCA Crim 3452..........................................................................................99, 101 R v M (Edward) & Ors [2002] 1 Cr App R 25 .............................................................................97 R v Martin [2003] 2 Cr App R 322 .........................................................................................96, 99 R v Matheson [1958] 1 WLR 474 ...............................................................................................248 R v Meade [1909] 1 KB 895........................................................................................................185 R v Monkhouse (1849) 4 Cox CC 55..........................................................................................182 R v Neaven [2007] 2 All ER 891 .................................................................................................245 R v O'Connell [1996] EWCA Crim 1552 ...................................................................................238 R v O'Connor (1994) 15 Cr App R 473......................................................................................196 R v O'Donoghue (1927) 20 Cr App R 132 .................................................................................217 R v O'Driscoll (1977) 65 Cr App R 50........................................................................................190 R v Pearson ’ s case (1835) 2 Lew 144 ...........................................................................................192 R v Pinfold and Mackenney [2004] 2 Cr App R 5.......................................................................157 R v Podola [1960] 1 QB 325 ................................................................................ 61, 81 – 3, 99, 162 R v Price [1963] 2 QB 1..............................................................................................................162 R v Quick [1973] 57 Cr App R 722 ......................................................................120, 128 – 30, 133 R v Ramchurn [2010] 2 Cr App R 3 ...........................................................................................243 R v Reniger v Feogossa (1551) 75 ER 1 .......................................................................................174 R v Reynolds (Gary) [2004] EWCA Crim 1834 ..........................................................................236 R v Richardson and Irwin (1999) 1 Cr App Rep 392...................................................................189 R v Rivett (1950) 34 Cr App R 87.................................................................................................82 R v Roach [2001] EWCA Crim 2698..........................................................................................129 R v Roberts [1954] 2 QB 329..................................................................................................83, 99 R v Robertson [1968] 1 WLR 1767.......................................................................................99, 101 R v Sainsbury (1989) 11 Cr App R (S) 533 .................................................................................224 R v Sanderson (1994) 98 Cr App R 325 ..................................................................................238 – 9 Table of Cases xvii This is an open access version of the publication distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial- NoDerivs licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/), which permits non-commercial reproduction and distribution of the work, in any medium, provided the original work is not altered or transformed in any way, and that the work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact academic.permissions@oup.com R v Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex parte Doody (1994) 1 AC 57 .......................89 R v Seers (1984) 79 Cr App R 261 ..........................................................................................236 – 7 R v Sharp [1960] 1 QB 357.....................................................................................................82, 99 R v Sheehan; R v Moore [1975] 1 WLR 739.................................................................45, 187, 192 R v Smith [1979] 1 WLR 1445 ...................................................................................................157 R v Smith (Morgan) [2001] 1 Cr App R 31........................................................ 23, 28, 252, 257 – 8 R v Soderman (1935) AC 462 .....................................................................................................163 R v Spriggs [1958] 1 QB 270 ......................................................................................................236 R v Stapleton (1952) 86 CLR 358 ...............................................................................................121 R v Stewart [2009] 2 Cr App R 500 ....................................................................................195, 240 R v Stripp (1979) 69 Cr App R 318 ............................................................................127, 157, 161 R v Sullivan [1984] 1 AC 156................................................................. 26, 111, 118 – 19, 127, 130 R v Sutcliffe, The Times, 30 April 1981 ......................................................................................247 R v T [1990] Crim LR 256 .................................................................................................128, 133 R v Tandy [1989] 1 WLR 350 ................................................................................194 – 5, 239, 248 R v Tolson (1889) 23 QBD 168..................................................................................................130 R v Turner [1975] QB 834..........................................................................................................157 R v Walden [1959] 1 WLR 1008 ................................................................................................242 R v Weekes [1999] 2 Cr App R 520 ............................................................................................236 R v Windle [1952] 2 QB 826 ......................................................................................................121 R v Wood [2010] 1 Cr App R (S) 6.............................................................................................241 R v Wood (Clive) [2009] 1 WLR 496 .................................................................................195, 240 R v Woods (1982) 74 Cr App Rep 312 .......................................................................................189 Rabey v R (1980) 15 CR (3d) 225 (Canada) ...............................................................................128 Reg v Cruse (1838) 8 C & P 541 ................................................................................................182 Reg v Smith (Sidney) (1845) 1 Cox CC 260 .................................................................................78 Reg v Turton (1854) 6 Cox 395 ....................................................................................................82 Reniger v Feogossa (1551) 75 ER 1 .............................................................................................174 Rex v Carroll (1835) 7 C & P 145...............................................................................................182 Rex v Dashwood [1943] KB 1 .................................................................................................61, 86 Rex v Dyson (1831) 7 C & P 305 .....................................................................................77, 81, 99 Rex v Meakin (1836) 173 ER 132 ...............................................................................................182 Rex v North (1937) 1 Criminal Law Journal 84 ..........................................................................156 Rex v Pritchard (1836) 7 C & P 303 .................................................................. 75, 77, 81, 99 – 100 Rex v Smith (1910) 6 Cr App R 19 .............................................................................................162 Rose v R [1961] AC 496..............................................................................................................237 Ruse v Read [1949] 1 KB 377 .....................................................................................................190 SC v United Kingdom (2004) 40 EHRR 10 (ECHR) ...................................................................93 T v United Kingdom (2000) 30 EHRR 121; V v United Kingdom (2000) EHRR 121 (Application No 24724/94) (ECHR) ...............................................................................89, 93 Watmore v Jenkins [1962] 2 QB 572 ..................................................................................126, 161 Wheeler and Batsford v Alderson (1831) 3 Hog Ecc 574 .............................................................184 Winterwerp v The Netherlands (1979) 2 EHRR 387 (ECHR)......................................................85 Woolmington v DPP [1935] All ER 1 .................................................. 78, 122 – 3, 161, 163