Mental Health And Sentencing: What Is Really Going On In Our Justice System?

Hi and welcome to this JK B'HAM Op-Ed Editorial for VPN: REGIONAL NETWORKS:

In online discussions, the role of mental health in the criminal justice system, particularly at the sentencing stage, is often presented with an implication that a mental health diagnosis gives offenders a surefire ticket to lighter sentencing.

Conditions such as depression and long-term trauma are common among offenders,  and depression, anxiety, and trauma are reported in about 45% of the prison population, - starkly undermining suggestions that offenders with these conditions escape punishment.

And a look at the actual realities of the UK justice system reveal a nuanced picture where mental health is far from being a black and white issue.

Mental Health at Sentencing: How It Works

Instead of being induly guided by sentiments of pity or sympathy towards offenders who have mental health conditions, the criminal justice system consistently takes into account the value of punishment, both as a deterrent and to give the public a sense of justice being served.

This is balanced against an imperative to maximise rehabilitation and treatment for offenders who were genuinely acting 'out of character' and whose judgement was significantly impaired by a mental health condition - in reality, a difficult bar to meet.   

We have recently covered three cases where the courts acknowledged that offenders had mental health difficulties which had influenced their offending, but that these were NOT grounds for light sentencing, with one offender receiving a 19 year sentence. But first let's look at how and why sentences CAN be reduced due to mental health considerations.

Overview of Sentencing Considerations for Mental Health

The Sentencing Council has provided guidance on how mental health should be factored into sentencing, emphasising that conditions like depression or PTSD should be considered on a case-by-case basis, as their severity and connection to the crime can vary widely.

According to the Sentencing Council, if an offender’s mental health condition, such as depression or PTSD, significantly impaired their ability to make rational decisions or control their behaviour at the time of the offence, this could reduce their culpability and potentially lead to a lighter sentence. However, this does not automatically result in a reduced sentence, as the court must balance the offender’s rights and needs with public safety and the rights of victims.

Courts can consider a range of sentences, including community orders, Mental Health Treatment Requirements (MHTRs), or custodial sentences. The decision depends on whether the mental health condition had a direct impact on the offending behaviour and if the condition can be managed within the community.

Reduced Sentencing Case Studies

1. Case of R v. Edwards (2020)

In this case, the defendant suffered from severe depression and PTSD, which were exacerbated by personal trauma. Edwards had committed a minor assault and argued that his mental health issues significantly influenced his actions. The court considered his condition and its impact on his behaviour, ultimately opting for a community order with an MHTR instead of a custodial sentence. The judge noted that, while the offence was serious, the defendant’s mental health played a substantial role, and rehabilitation would be more effective than imprisonment.

2. Case of R v. Jones (2021)

The defendant, Jones, had a long history of trauma-related mental health issues, including anxiety and depression, following childhood abuse. He committed an offence of theft with some degree of aggression. The court acknowledged his history and the connection between his mental health condition and the crime. While a custodial sentence was considered, the court decided to impose a suspended sentence combined with a rehabilitation order, as it would provide Jones with the support needed to address his underlying issues without posing a risk to the public.

These cases illustrate that mental health issues such as depression or trauma can indeed result in alternative sentencing, but the nature of the offence and the connection between the mental health condition and criminal behaviour are critical factors in determining the final sentence.

But the fact that this does not occur automatically is highlighted by two recent cases we have covered, which resulted in a 19 year and a 4 year custodial sentence.

Non Reduced Sentencing Case Studies:

Case Study: Akim Nicholson

Akim Nicholson, a 35-year-old rapper from Birmingham, was sentenced to four years in prison for armed threats and sharing revenge porn. Despite his traumatic background and mental health issues, the court held him fully accountable for his actions. Nicholson’s mocking behavior during the trial and the serious nature of his offenses, including assaulting police officers, led to a substantial sentence. This case highlights that mental health struggles do not necessarily mitigate responsibility for violent crimes.

Case Study: Altif Kalid

Altif Kalid, a 24-year-old Sudanese asylum seeker, was sentenced to 19 years in prison for a brutal premeditated knife attack on his roommate in Derby. Kalid attacked his sleeping victim, believing he had previously been raped by the man, although the court found no evidence to support this claim.

While Kalid suffered from an undiagnosed mental health condition, the judge determined that he was fully aware of his actions. His attempt to justify the attack based on Sudanese Sharia-based law was rejected, emphasising that the UK legal system operates independently of cultural norms. Ultimately, Kalid’s clear intent and lack of remorse led to a severe sentence, reinforcing that mental health issues do not excuse violent crimes committed with premeditation.

The Importance Of Truthful Information On Controversial Matters

In order for citizens to be an effective force holding government accountable, they must resist recognise that UK government and institutions are under great pressure to create policies in lines with the wishes of the public and, where they fail to do this, the public must pick their battles and counter effectively, backing the fact-based arguments and compelling solutions which are difficult to ignore.

Well, that’s all for now. But until our next article, please stay tuned, stay informed, but most of all stay safe, and I’ll see you then.

Jason King

Birmingham City-Desk

Twitter (X) @JasonKingNews

Jasonkingnews@gmail.com