R v Conroy [2017] EWCA Crim 81 Court of Appeal

The defendant had ASD and ADHD. He had a traumatic upbringing and spent much time in care. He had a history of  violent and sexualised behaviour. He was living in a residential home for young sufferers of Asperger’s  syndrome and formed an obsession with a fellow resident. On the day of the killing he went to her room with the intention of having sex with her. He knew she did not want to have sex with him. He strangled her with the intention of rendering her unconscious so that he could take her to his room and have intercourse with her.

The trial judge directed the jury:

"In applying the expression 'rational judgement' to this case you are not asking yourselves whether the outcome of the defendant's thought processes was rational, namely the killing of Melissa, so that he could have sex with her, on any view that was an irrational outcome, you must ask yourselves whether the thought processes that led to that outcome were rational. You must concentrate on the process and not the outcome of that process.

So the question is, has the defendant established that it is more probable than not that his ability, either to form a rational judgement or to exercise self-control, was substantially impaired?... "

The Jury returned a verdict of murder. He appealed on the grounds of a misdirection. 

The Court of Appeal upheld his conviction.

Back to lecture outline on diminished responsibility in criminal law