Westwood, R v

Westwood, R v

The judge erred in assessing the appellant’s retained responsibility as medium to high; the only sustainable conclusion on the evidence was that it was low. The appellant’s offence was largely attributable to his mental disorder, and his anger was a manifestation of his illness. Given the low level of retained...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant: Thomas Westwood; Respondent: The Queen
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
06 May 2020
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
appeal allowed; sentence quashed; hospital order with restriction substituted
Legal Topics
Manslaughter by Diminished Responsibility, Sentencing, Mental Disorder Disposals, Public Protection, Culpability Assessment
Criminal Law Mental Health Law Manslaughter by Diminished Responsibility Sentencing Mental Disorder Disposals Public Protection Culpability Assessment

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 4 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Thomas Westwood

Appellant

The Queen

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the imposition of an extended sentence of imprisonment with a hospital direction under section 45A of the Mental Health Act 1983 was wrong in principle
  2. 2 Whether a hospital order under section 37 with a restriction order under section 41 was the appropriate disposal
  3. 3 Whether the custodial term imposed was manifestly excessive

Ratio Decidendi

The judge erred in assessing the appellant’s retained responsibility as medium to high; the only sustainable conclusion on the evidence was that it was low. The appellant’s offence was largely attributable to his mental disorder, and his anger was a manifestation of his illness. Given the low level of retained responsibility, the need for lifelong treatment, and the public protection afforded by sections 37 and 41, a penal element was not appropriate. The sentence imposed was wrong in principle and must be quashed in favour of a hospital order with restriction.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed; sentence quashed; hospital order with restriction substituted

Orders

  • The sentence of extended imprisonment with hospital direction under section 45A is quashed.
  • Orders under sections 37 and 41 of the Mental Health Act 1983 are substituted.