my son has been accussed of abusing afriend 10 years ago

[anxiousmum]

my son who is now 25 was arrested 18 months ago accussed of sexual assults on a friend 10 years plus ago, my son is 3 half years older but not in marurity. My son has been suffering from schizoprenia since he was 16 and possibly before then because the accussors mother gave him cannibas regularly since he was 14. He has a solicitor who specializes in mental health but not in this sort of case, however after 2 psychiatrists, a psychologist and the prosecutors psychiatrist's report it has been agreed that he is unable to stand trail. This it seems will not go in his favour and the barrister is not optamistic! his hearing is on 22nd August and I have been trying to contact the solicitor to arrange a meeting with the barrister but they have not got back to me over the last 3 weeks.
During the lenghty police interviews, which would have been very confusing and anxiety provoking for my son, he made comments that the police felt were admissions of guilt which is why the DPPs have continued with the case but having read the interveiws were not. The accusser has been overheard talking about getting loads of compensation and knowing him and his family this is true to form. They are my nieghbours and there has been a "feud" over a number of years, I have had to call the police on a number of occassions due to intimidation causing disturbances etc.
I feel they are doing this to my son because he is an easy target and it seems there is little we can do because he cannot defend himself. I am a single parent on a low wage and my son is unable to work due to the untreatable illness that he suffers.
ANY HELP, SUGGESTIONS, ADVICE GRATEFULLY RECIEVED.

[Faith]

Sorry to hear this.
what stage is the case at? 18 months on, is there a trial date?

As a side note, I do believe it unlikely that the schizophrenia was caused by cannibis

[anxiousmum]

drug induced psychosis

when cannibis is taken on a regular basis at a young age ie when the brain is developing it is known to cause or exacherbate psychosis. he has been charged and the courtdate is the end of this month in front of a jury who I understand must decide whether this happened as he is unable to stand trail which ironically will not go in his favour.

[lawlessone2009]

when cannibis is taken on a regular basis at a young age ie when the brain is developing it is known to cause or exacherbate psychosis. he has been charged and the courtdate is the end of this month in front of a jury who I understand must decide whether this happened as he is unable to stand trail which ironically will not go in his favour.

I'm a little confused. He is unable to stand trial but there is a trial by jury at the end of this month... Who's actually standing trial?

I would be deeply concerned if you are unable to contact your legal team. What preparation are they making for a trial?

What 'plea' is being discussed?

Your interpretation of the statements may vary from the Police/prosecutor. They may feel that if they are able to have him state things in a certain way then they will be able to influence a jury enough to gain a conviction. If he is as ill as you have detailed then he should not be taking the stand and this is backed up by the various medical reports you have mentioned. Putting him on trial anyway seems a little cruel as he will be unable to defend any accusations made against him.

As for cannabis affecting the mind in drastic ways. I disbelieve this. People are predisposed to certain mental illnesses and although drugs can add to the problem I would find it highly questionable that they actually 'add' to the problem in a permanent manner. Cannabis may allow the mind to 'expand' in various directions of thought which in turn might breakdown certain control barriers that are built into the mind (through education for instance) but these detours are generally reversable. Of course if the mind is already on its own detour then cannabis will in no way assist in preventing the escalation of the problem and could very well permanently add to it. I suppose I am now arguing with myself and have completely contradicted myself...

So cannabis is bad in your sons case. It by no means makes him a sexual abuser of any type. He deserves the best of defences available to him and it does not sound as if he, at present, is receiving this. I would contact your legal team and give them an ultimatum, "get your ass in gear or get out".

If they don't start acting soon and formulating a defence then I would stand at the initial hearing and request an allowance to seek alternate representation and then outline your reasons clearly to the court. They can then decide on what has to happen. Others of course will verify if I am correct in my wording here as I could be wrong (where are you Rights Fighter? )

[Casehardened]

Hi,

Just to clarify matters, would I be correct in thinking that a judge has ruled that your son is unfit to plead (i.e. guilty or not guilty) and therefore a jury will be asked to consider the facts and decide on his guilt or otherwise (so not much difference to a normal trial except they won't actually see him, which I think is what you are worried about)

Obviously as he will not be able to take the stand himself it is important that his legal team put forward the very best defence they can and it is worrying that you don't have absolute confidence in them. Unfortunately, at this stage so close to trial, if you are on legal aid, it will be very difficult to change solicitors (basically you would have to first apply to the LSC for permission and you may well find that other firms will be reluctant to take the case on at this stage) so it's probably best to stick with who you have already instructed.

If you have concerns about anything, politely nag them over the phone, but also put these concerns in writing to the senior partner as it is easy to forget a verbal request but, when a request is down on paper, there will be an incentive to do something about it.

[Rights Fighter]

Schizophrenia is treatable. Providing he takes the correct medication in correct doses he can live a pretty much normal life.

It may be that currently he is unfit to plead or unfit to stand trial.

The accusers may well have introduced him to cannabis but unless they tied him down and forced it upon him they cannot be accused of being responsible for his current condition.

You mention some sort of hearing. None of us can know what this is as we haven't had sight of the paperwork and obviously none of us are not part of the defence team.

I suggest you follow Casehardened's advice and write to a senior partner in the firm stating your concerns and that if somebody does not talk to you (or your son) then you will consider making a formal complaint to the Law Society. If your son is unfit to plead or unfit to stand trial then he obviously needs an advocate who can speak and ask questions for him. If for some reason this cannot be you then it needs to be somebody he knows and trusts and who knows him well.

It is a very difficult time for you and your son and you really do need to talk to somebody who knows more about the case than we do. You have my sympathies. This cannot be pleasant for anybody. Keep coming back to get support even if we cannot help in a practical way.

[anxiousmum]

His diagnosis is a treatment resistant psychosis, he is on medication and takes it as he should and lives his life as best he can with the voices and paranoia that he experiences every day of his life!
As a psychiatric nurse with 20 years experience I am well aware of the effect of drugs on mental health.
I am aware that he took the drugs but he was very young vulnerable and niave and did not understand the dangers but trusted the adult who was giving him the drugs.
His mental health problems and how he got to this place is not the main problem, we have been coping with this for 10 years, me being his main carer.
My concern is that because he is unable to stand trail the barrister is not optimistic. He will not be asked to answer questions (with or without an advocate), my understanding is that he will stand in the dock but not be questioned or put in a plea. The prosecution will put forward their case and my son's solicitor will put forward ours and the jury need to decide.
The solicitors is a small firm and one of the partners is in charge of the case but never phones me back, shouldn't they be preparing for the court date in 2 weeks time now? We have had a meeting with the barrister and he asked me to write out a statement which I did and also a details from a witness who overheard the man talking about compensation, but we have not heard anything since.
Would appreciate more advice on the legal system please.

[Rights Fighter]

Ah ok thanks for the clarification. My concern was that if you try to 'blame' the complainant and their family for your lad taking cannabis it will not sit well with the jury and the Crown will accuse the defence of trying to muddy waters with red herrings.

I have to say I have never heard of a trial proceeding where the def is unable to make a plea / give evidence and a jury is then put to the task of coming to a verdict. that is not to say it doesn't happen - it's a first for me if this does, though.

I would suggest you write to the senior partner with your concerns (even though he is in charge of the case) and tell him that you feel you are being kept out of the loop, your lad cannot instruct him due to his illness, and that you need to be updated as to what will happen. If he does not comply with the request then you will have no alternative but to report him to the Law Society complaints department.

Remind him of Article 6 of the Human rights Act:

Article 6: Right to a fair trial

1. In the determination of his civil rights and obligations or of any criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law. Judgment shall be pronounced publicly, but the press and public may be excluded from all or part of the trial in the interests of morals, public order or national security in a democratic society, where the interests of juveniles or the protection of the private life of the parties so require, or to the extent strictly necessary in the opinion of the court in special circumstances where publicity would prejudice the interests of justice.

2. Everyone charged with a criminal offence shall be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law.

3. Everyone charged with a criminal offence has the following minimum rights -

(a) to be informed promptly, in a language which he or she understands and in detail, of the nature and cause of the accusation against him;

(b) to have adequate time and facilities for the preparation of his defence;

(c) to defend himself in person or through legal assistance of his own choosing or, if he has not sufficient means to pay for legal assistance, to be given it free when the interests of justice so require;

(d) to examine or have examined witnesses against him and to obtain the attendance and examination of witnesses on his behalf under the same conditions as witnesses against him;

(e) to have the free assistance of an interpreter if he cannot understand or speak the language used in court.'


Article 6 applies to both civil and criminal proceedings. It provides that everyone has the right to a fair trial and sets standards for the way that hearings should be conducted. You may believe that you have not had a fair trial if you lose your case, but Article 6 will only be broken if these standards have not been met.


Criminal proceedings result from the comission of an offence by an individual. Under Article 6, criminal proceedings have a wider meaning than they usually have in English law, for example, cases against people for contempt of court for non payment of Concil Tax.


Article 6 covers civil cases involving disputes between private parties or organisations. It may also cover disputes between a private person or organisation and the Government or a public authority.


Civil proceedings that are covered by Article 6 include disputes about who the children of separated parents should live with, and how much contact they should have. Other types of hearing, such as employment tribunals and social security tribunals may also be covered.


If your lad does not understand what is going on he is entitled to an advocate (I am not talking about his barrister here but a family member or trusted friend) who can speak for him. It may assist if you take out an enduring power of attorney. Google it - you can get a free form online (don't allow yourself to be bamboozled by the law firms charging for this) and get your lad to sign it and also witnessed by a responsible person, not the person taking over the PoA.

Any of the above highlighted bits could relate to your son's plight.

[largactyl1]

Hi there, I'm so sorry that you find yourself here, but you will get lots of advice and a shoulder to cry on at this difficult time. I have bipolar and my son is schizo-affective and so I understand the difficulties your son faces. It is vital that his problems with the chronic nature (presumably with horrible break through symptoms both the positive and negative kinds - for those that don't know "positive" means things that happen like voices and paranoia "negative" being a horriblen overwhelming malaise), of his illness is really pushed - afterall - it could happen that he starts to imagine or hear from his voices that he is guilty when in fact he is innocent and as you know could bring about an acute episode and potential sectioning due to the stress he is suffering. He is clearly not able to make any sound defence for himself. It is a wicked thing he has been Falsely Accused.

If I can be any help at all with the Mental Health side of things please just ask - and PM when you can (I think you have to be a user of the site for a while to be able to do that). I'm not as good as others at the legal side as Tony was NFA ed before any really entangling and confusing legal stuff occured.

Kind Regards
Jen

[Rights Fighter]

Thanks Largactyl for you personal understanding. I am sure the OP will be very grateful for your offer of help from your own personal experience. Most of us cannot offer that empathy.

[Rights Fighter]

Many thanks to Casehardened who has sent me this link

http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/l_to_o/m...red_offenders/

Exgtract:

Principle

The CPS uses the term "mentally disordered offender" to describe a person who has a disability or disorder of the mind and has committed or is suspected of committing a criminal offence. This term covers a range of offences, disabilities and disorders. A mental disorder may be relevant to:

• The decision to prosecute or divert;
• Fitness to plead; and
• Sentencing/Disposal.

Each case must be considered on its merits, taking into account all available information about any mental health problem, and its relevance to the offence, in addition to the principles set out in the Code for Crown Prosecutors. The Code explains that there is a balance to be struck between the public interest in diverting a defendant with significant mental illness from the criminal justice system and other public interest factors in favour of prosecution including the need to safeguard the public.


If there is significant evidence to establish that a defendant or suspect has a significant mental illness, a prosecution may not be appropriate unless the offence is serious or there is a real possibility that it may be repeated.


If proceedings have been started or are being considered and the CPS is provided with a medical report which states that the strain of criminal proceedings may lead to a considerable worsening of the defendant's mental health, the implications of the report should be considered very carefully.


This is a difficult field because in some cases the defendant may have become disturbed and depressed by the mere fact that his or her conduct has been discovered, and any suggestions that continuing the criminal proceedings will significantly worsen the defendant's condition should be evaluated carefully.

In serious cases where a prosecution is plainly needed unless there is clear evidence that continuing the case would be likely to result in a permanent deterioration in the defendant's condition, it may be appropriate to obtain an independent medical report. Where the prosecutor is satisfied that the probable effect on the defendant's health outweighs the public interest considerations in favour of a prosecution, the case should be discontinued and full reasons recorded on the file.




It looks like there may be a balance on whether he is likely to 're-offend'. If there have been other allegations made against him in the past that would weigh against him. If there have not then that would lower the 'risk' that he would reoffend.

[Saffron]

Hello
I can't add anything to the excellent advice already given, but wanted to say "welcome"

[anxiousmum]

thank you every one who has posted help and support, wish I had found this site before now as I think it's probebly a bit late in the day for some of your suggestions, however will talk to the sol tonight, eventually he can speak to me, about your advice Rights Fighter that is certainly pertinant to his case, he has never been accused of anything like this and has been suffering from mental health problems long before these accusations, he has been sectioned twice and was kept on a secure unit for some time but since starting on clozeril has been as well as he can be.
Thank you largactyl1 for your understanding, as you say he is very suggestable and truly believes his hullucinations have really happened, he also has difficulty processing information which is why I do not think the police interview should be used. He was taken into the police station on 2 occasions for questioning for at least 4 hours, (questioning only lasted 1 hour and then 30 mins), each time and despite being aadvised by his sol to say no comment he did not understand this and commented about being places with this man, (they were both children at the time and were friends). Apparently this was enough to charge him! This man has said it happened when he was 7yrs but we did not live there until he was 9yrs and they were not friends for atleast 1-2yrs after we moved in.
All the medical reports have clearly said that this could make him worse the most invoved was from the DPS psychiatrist.
Thanks for all your help and support.

[largactyl1]

Hi A.M. Did he have a Responsible Adult with him at the interview? I'm not sure why this is important but I know thaty other people I know with well documented MH problems have had to have an RA with them and it has been a necessary requirement.
Kind Wishes
Jen

[Rights Fighter]

thank you every one who has posted help and support, wish I had found this site before now as I think it's probebly a bit late in the day for some of your suggestions, however will talk to the sol tonight, eventually he can speak to me, about your advice Rights Fighter that is certainly pertinant to his case, he has never been accused of anything like this and has been suffering from mental health problems long before these accusations, he has been sectioned twice and was kept on a secure unit for some time but since starting on clozeril has been as well as he can be.
Thank you largactyl1 for your understanding, as you say he is very suggestable and truly believes his hullucinations have really happened, he also has difficulty processing information which is why I do not think the police interview should be used. He was taken into the police station on 2 occasions for questioning for at least 4 hours, (questioning only lasted 1 hour and then 30 mins), each time and despite being aadvised by his sol to say no comment he did not understand this and commented about being places with this man, (they were both children at the time and were friends). Apparently this was enough to charge him! This man has said it happened when he was 7yrs but we did not live there until he was 9yrs and they were not friends for atleast 1-2yrs after we moved in.
All the medical reports have clearly said that this could make him worse the most invoved was from the DPS psychiatrist.
Thanks for all your help and support.

It appears to me that he really should have had what is known as an 'appropriate adult' with him as well as the solicitor, such as a psychiatric nurse or somebody from his mental health team. Did this happen?