As an alternative, under s.4A of the Criminal Procedure (insanity) Act 1964, the jury was directed that they could make findings in respect of the criminal offences- that the father did commit the alleged offences. In the criminal matter, the jury was directed that no verdicts could be returned by the jury which meant the father could not be convicted. As a result, by agreement, he did not give evidence in the family proceedings. Days later the father was detained in accordance with s.2 of the Mental Health Act 1983- admission for assessment of mental health. He was found to lack litigation capacity and Official Solicitor consented to act as his Litigation Friend. In the criminal proceedings, the father was found to be unfit to plead. Criminal proceedings ran alongside the care proceedings, but unexpected delays caused Mr Justice Keehan to undertake a split hearing and only consider the fact finding element at this particular hearing, on 18th August 2017. It was alleged that the children had suffered emotional abuse from the mother and maternal grandmother as well as physical and sexual abuse from the father and two of the mother’s other partners. Clarity on this matter is provided in the case of Wolverhampton City Council v JA and others.* In this case the Local Authority issued care proceedings in respect of two children aged 13 and 12 years.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |