R v Jenkins - [2019] NZHC 1231

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WELLINGTON REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TE WHANGANUI-A-TARA ROHE

CRI 2019-091-474

[2019] NZHC 1231

THE QUEEN

v

EDMUND ALAN JENKINS

Hearing: 31 May 2019

Counsel:

G J Burston for Crown

J Bonifant for Defendant

Judgment:

31 May 2019

JUDGMENT OF ELLIS J

[1] Mr Jenkins is charged with murdering Edith Roderique on 5 March 2019. He is 75 years old. He has no criminal history.

[2] It has been evident from the outset that there would be an issue about whether Mr Jenkins was fit to stand trial. The process for determining that under the Criminal Procedure (Mentally Impaired Persons) Act 2003 (the Act) has been undertaken. This judgment records my determination of the issues arising under that process, with reasons.

Section 8A inquiry: is the defendant unfit to stand trial?

[3] Section 7 of the Act provides that a court may make a finding that a defendant is unfit to stand trial at any stage after the commencement of the proceedings and until

R v JENKINS [2019] NZHC 1231 [31 May 2019]

all the evidence is concluded. A determination of unfitness is governed by s 8A, which relevantly provides:

(1) The court must receive the evidence of 2 health assessors as to whether the defendant is mentally impaired.

(2) If the court is satisfied on the evidence given under subsection (1) that the defendant is mentally impaired, the court must record a finding to that effect and—

(a)give each party an opportunity to be heard and to present evidence as to whether the defendant is unfit to stand trial; and

(b)find whether or not the defendant is unfit to stand trial; and

(c)record the finding made under paragraph (b).

(3) The standard of proof required for a finding under subsection (2) is the balance of probabilities.

…

(5) If the court records a finding under subsection (2) that the defendant is unfit to stand trial, the court must inquire into the defendant’s involvement in the offence under section 10, 11 or 12, as the case requires.

[4] In Mr Jenkins’ case, the Court received reports from two consultant psychiatrists, Dr Justin-Barry Walsh and Dr Anthony Duncan. Both gave evidence at the hearing today.

[5] On 22 March 2019 Dr Barry-Walsh assessed Mr Jenkins as unfit to stand trial. At that stage, he was uncertain as to whether Mr Jenkins was insane at the time of the offending.

[6] Dr Duncan assessed Mr Jenkins twice. On 20 May 2019 Dr Duncan reported that Mr Jenkins was (in his view) fit to plead but unfit to stand trial. He was also of the view that Mr Jenkins “may well have a defence of insanity available”.

[7] On 28 May 2019 Dr Barry-Walsh provided an updating report, following a further interview with Mr Jenkins the day before. In it, he helpfully summarises his previous report as well as Dr Duncan’s.

[8] In short, the expert evidence was that Mr Jenkins has a history…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading R v Jenkins

Details

AGLC: R v Jenkins [2019] NZHC 1231
Case: [2019] NZHC 1231
Decision Date: 31 May 2019

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case before the High Court of New Zealand concerns the fitness of Edmund Alan Jenkins to stand trial for the murder of Edith Roderique. Jenkins, aged 75 and with no prior criminal history, is alleged to have killed Roderique on 5 March 2019. The court was tasked with determining Jenkins' fitness to stand trial under the Criminal Procedure (Mentally Impaired Persons) Act 2003. The court received evidence from two health assessors, Dr Justin-Barry Walsh and Dr Anthony Duncan, both of whom diagnosed Jenkins with frontal lobe dementia, concluding that he was unfit to stand trial due to memory problems, impairment in executive functioning, and difficulties with language. Dr Barry-Walsh concluded that there was little prospect of Jenkins being restored to a fit state, while Dr Duncan suggested there may have been an element of automatism in Jenkins' actions.

The court found that the expert evidence established Jenkins was mentally impaired and, on the balance of probabilities, unfit to stand trial. The court also concluded that there was sufficient evidence to establish that Jenkins caused the death of Roderique. The court subsequently ordered Jenkins to be detained in a hospital as a special patient under the Mental Health (Compulsory Assessment and Treatment) Act 1992, allowing for secure containment while his risk is further assessed. Name suppression orders in place for Jenkins were allowed to lapse, and the court ordered the release of the psychiatrists' reports to Jenkins' responsible clinicians.

Orders