Criminal Justice Outcomes of Those Appearing before the Mental Health Tribunal: A Record Linkage Study

Abstract

To examine the utilisation of the insanity defence in Queensland and insanity acquittee reoffending, offences cleared by the police were compared with charges heard by the Mental Health Tribunal (MHT) and appearances before the MHT from 1985 to 2002 were cross-linked with police databases. Only 0.24% of cleared offences were heard by the MHT. This plea rate was similar to that in the US jurisdictions where the insanity defence has been extensively researched. Overall, persons not afforded an insanity defence reoffended more frequently, committed more offences, including more violent offences, and committed more serious offences as measured by the National Offence Index. Furthermore, offending occurred sooner than that of insanity acquittees. Evidence was not found for ''over-use'' of the insanity defence and overall, recidivism was lower and less serious for insanity acquittees. There is a need for further research to more comprehensively identify factors associated with positive outcomes.

First Nations Peoples in the forensic mental health system in New South Wales: Characteristics and rates of criminal charges post-release

“…In a recent Australian study examining the rates and predictors of post-release justice contact among a cohort of 477 forensic patients, 6.3% of released NGMI forensic patients had a subsequent proven offence recorded over 12 months ( Dean et al, 2020 ), much lower than local prison-release reconviction rates. Rates of reoffending may be higher among particularly groups of forensic patients, including those with a diagnosis of co-morbid personality disorder ( Charette et al, 2015 ; Dean et al, 2020 ), co-morbid substance use problems ( Simpson et al, 2018 ) and a prior criminal history ( Green et al, 2011 ).…”