Shickle,R. v

Shickle,R. v

The court held that there was no reasonable explanation for failing to adduce the evidence of diminished responsibility at trial. The appellant's psychiatric condition did not prevent her from instructing her lawyers, and the evidence supporting diminished responsibility was not available or compelling at the time....

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Respondent: The Queen; Appellant: Susan Shickle
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
14 July 2005
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal After Referral by the Criminal Cases Review Commission
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; conviction upheld
Legal Topics
Murder, Diminished Responsibility, Fresh Evidence, Appeal Procedure
Criminal Law Murder Diminished Responsibility Fresh Evidence Appeal Procedure

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Queen

Respondent

Susan Shickle

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal After Referral by the Criminal Cases Review Commission

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether fresh psychiatric evidence supporting diminished responsibility should be admitted on appeal
  2. 2 Whether the conviction for murder is unsafe in light of new psychiatric evidence
  3. 3 Whether there is a reasonable explanation for not adducing diminished responsibility at trial

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that there was no reasonable explanation for failing to adduce the evidence of diminished responsibility at trial. The appellant's psychiatric condition did not prevent her from instructing her lawyers, and the evidence supporting diminished responsibility was not available or compelling at the time. The fresh evidence is controversial and does not render the conviction unsafe. The appeal is therefore dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; conviction upheld