R. v Ahmed (Saber Mohammed Ali)

Ashworth reports on R. v Ahmed (Saber Mohammed Ali). In 2006, D was convicted of manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility. The medical reports stated that D was suffering from a severe depressive episode with psychotic symptoms, but that the condition wasn't of a nature or degre...
Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:

Autor*in:	Andrew Ashworth [verfasserIn] Ronnie Mackay

Format:	Artikel
Sprache:	Englisch

Erschienen:	2017

Schlagwörter:	Court decisions Mental disorders Criminal sentences Manslaughter

Übergeordnetes Werk:	Enthalten in: The criminal law review - London : Thomson / Sweet & Maxwell, 1954, (2017), 2, Seite 150
Übergeordnetes Werk:	year:2017 ; number:2 ; pages:150

Links:	Link aufrufen

Katalog-ID:	OLC1990384323

Internformat


LEADER	01000caa a2200265 4500
001	OLC1990384323
003	DE-627
005	20230715031658.0
007	tu
008	170303s2017 xx \|\|\|\|\| 00\| \|\|eng c
028	5	2	\|a PQ20170301
035			\|a (DE-627)OLC1990384323
035			\|a (DE-599)GBVOLC1990384323
035			\|a (PRQ)proquest_journals_18714862100
035			\|a (KEY)0032121420170000000000200150rvahmedsabermohammedali
040			\|a DE-627 \|b ger \|c DE-627 \|e rakwb
041			\|a eng
082	0	4	\|a 340 \|q DE-600
084			\|a INTRECHT \|2 fid
100	0		\|a Andrew Ashworth \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
245	1	0	\|a R. v Ahmed (Saber Mohammed Ali)
264		1	\|c 2017
336			\|a Text \|b txt \|2 rdacontent
337			\|a ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen \|b n \|2 rdamedia
338			\|a Band \|b nc \|2 rdacarrier
520			\|a Ashworth reports on R. v Ahmed (Saber Mohammed Ali). In 2006, D was convicted of manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility. The medical reports stated that D was suffering from a severe depressive episode with psychotic symptoms, but that the condition wasn't of a nature or degree that made it appropriate for D to be detained in hospital. Here, Mackay and Ashworth state that the decision in Ahmed is important for three related reasons. First, it appears to depart from the strong skepticism of medical evidence pervading the Vowles judgment. Secondly, the judgment carefully evaluates the two release regimes and, in doing so, makes it clear that, in cases of this type, supervision and eventual release under a s.41 order may well protect the public more effectively than a hospital and limitation direction under s.45A. Thirdly, given the emphasis in Vowles, at (51), on punishment and on penal sentences as "the usual course", this judgment provides an illustration of the circumstances in which a court might properly depart from that course, in favor of public protection through rehabilitation and risk management.
650		4	\|a Court decisions
650		4	\|a Mental disorders
650		4	\|a Criminal sentences
650		4	\|a Manslaughter
700	0		\|a Ronnie Mackay \|4 oth
773	0	8	\|i Enthalten in \|t The criminal law review \|d London : Thomson / Sweet & Maxwell, 1954 \|g (2017), 2, Seite 150 \|w (DE-627)168200694 \|w (DE-600)702179-3 \|w (DE-576)015943658 \|x 0011-135X \|7 nnns
773	1	8	\|g year:2017 \|g number:2 \|g pages:150
856	4	2	\|u http://search.proquest.com/docview/1871486210
912			\|a GBV_USEFLAG_A
912			\|a SYSFLAG_A
912			\|a GBV_OLC
912			\|a FID-INTRECHT
912			\|a SSG-OLC-JUR
912			\|a GBV_ILN_11
912			\|a GBV_ILN_22
912			\|a GBV_ILN_40
912			\|a GBV_ILN_184
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2041
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4306
951			\|a AR
952			\|j 2017 \|e 2 \|h 150

Indexfelder

author_variant	a a aa
matchkey_str	article:0011135X:2017----::vhesbro
hierarchy_sort_str	2017
publishDate	2017
allfields	PQ20170301 (DE-627)OLC1990384323 (DE-599)GBVOLC1990384323 (PRQ)proquest_journals_18714862100 (KEY)0032121420170000000000200150rvahmedsabermohammedali DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 340 DE-600 INTRECHT fid Andrew Ashworth verfasserin aut R. v Ahmed (Saber Mohammed Ali) 2017 Text txt rdacontent ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen n rdamedia Band nc rdacarrier Ashworth reports on R. v Ahmed (Saber Mohammed Ali). In 2006, D was convicted of manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility. The medical reports stated that D was suffering from a severe depressive episode with psychotic symptoms, but that the condition wasn't of a nature or degree that made it appropriate for D to be detained in hospital. Here, Mackay and Ashworth state that the decision in Ahmed is important for three related reasons. First, it appears to depart from the strong skepticism of medical evidence pervading the Vowles judgment. Secondly, the judgment carefully evaluates the two release regimes and, in doing so, makes it clear that, in cases of this type, supervision and eventual release under a s.41 order may well protect the public more effectively than a hospital and limitation direction under s.45A. Thirdly, given the emphasis in Vowles, at (51), on punishment and on penal sentences as "the usual course", this judgment provides an illustration of the circumstances in which a court might properly depart from that course, in favor of public protection through rehabilitation and risk management. Court decisions Mental disorders Criminal sentences Manslaughter Ronnie Mackay oth Enthalten in The criminal law review London : Thomson / Sweet & Maxwell, 1954 (2017), 2, Seite 150 (DE-627)168200694 (DE-600)702179-3 (DE-576)015943658 0011-135X nnns year:2017 number:2 pages:150 http://search.proquest.com/docview/1871486210 GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC FID-INTRECHT SSG-OLC-JUR GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_184 GBV_ILN_2041 GBV_ILN_4306 AR 2017 2 150
spelling	PQ20170301 (DE-627)OLC1990384323 (DE-599)GBVOLC1990384323 (PRQ)proquest_journals_18714862100 (KEY)0032121420170000000000200150rvahmedsabermohammedali DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 340 DE-600 INTRECHT fid Andrew Ashworth verfasserin aut R. v Ahmed (Saber Mohammed Ali) 2017 Text txt rdacontent ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen n rdamedia Band nc rdacarrier Ashworth reports on R. v Ahmed (Saber Mohammed Ali). In 2006, D was convicted of manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility. The medical reports stated that D was suffering from a severe depressive episode with psychotic symptoms, but that the condition wasn't of a nature or degree that made it appropriate for D to be detained in hospital. Here, Mackay and Ashworth state that the decision in Ahmed is important for three related reasons. First, it appears to depart from the strong skepticism of medical evidence pervading the Vowles judgment. Secondly, the judgment carefully evaluates the two release regimes and, in doing so, makes it clear that, in cases of this type, supervision and eventual release under a s.41 order may well protect the public more effectively than a hospital and limitation direction under s.45A. Thirdly, given the emphasis in Vowles, at (51), on punishment and on penal sentences as "the usual course", this judgment provides an illustration of the circumstances in which a court might properly depart from that course, in favor of public protection through rehabilitation and risk management. Court decisions Mental disorders Criminal sentences Manslaughter Ronnie Mackay oth Enthalten in The criminal law review London : Thomson / Sweet & Maxwell, 1954 (2017), 2, Seite 150 (DE-627)168200694 (DE-600)702179-3 (DE-576)015943658 0011-135X nnns year:2017 number:2 pages:150 http://search.proquest.com/docview/1871486210 GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC FID-INTRECHT SSG-OLC-JUR GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_184 GBV_ILN_2041 GBV_ILN_4306 AR 2017 2 150
allfields_unstemmed	PQ20170301 (DE-627)OLC1990384323 (DE-599)GBVOLC1990384323 (PRQ)proquest_journals_18714862100 (KEY)0032121420170000000000200150rvahmedsabermohammedali DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 340 DE-600 INTRECHT fid Andrew Ashworth verfasserin aut R. v Ahmed (Saber Mohammed Ali) 2017 Text txt rdacontent ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen n rdamedia Band nc rdacarrier Ashworth reports on R. v Ahmed (Saber Mohammed Ali). In 2006, D was convicted of manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility. The medical reports stated that D was suffering from a severe depressive episode with psychotic symptoms, but that the condition wasn't of a nature or degree that made it appropriate for D to be detained in hospital. Here, Mackay and Ashworth state that the decision in Ahmed is important for three related reasons. First, it appears to depart from the strong skepticism of medical evidence pervading the Vowles judgment. Secondly, the judgment carefully evaluates the two release regimes and, in doing so, makes it clear that, in cases of this type, supervision and eventual release under a s.41 order may well protect the public more effectively than a hospital and limitation direction under s.45A. Thirdly, given the emphasis in Vowles, at (51), on punishment and on penal sentences as "the usual course", this judgment provides an illustration of the circumstances in which a court might properly depart from that course, in favor of public protection through rehabilitation and risk management. Court decisions Mental disorders Criminal sentences Manslaughter Ronnie Mackay oth Enthalten in The criminal law review London : Thomson / Sweet & Maxwell, 1954 (2017), 2, Seite 150 (DE-627)168200694 (DE-600)702179-3 (DE-576)015943658 0011-135X nnns year:2017 number:2 pages:150 http://search.proquest.com/docview/1871486210 GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC FID-INTRECHT SSG-OLC-JUR GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_184 GBV_ILN_2041 GBV_ILN_4306 AR 2017 2 150
allfieldsGer	PQ20170301 (DE-627)OLC1990384323 (DE-599)GBVOLC1990384323 (PRQ)proquest_journals_18714862100 (KEY)0032121420170000000000200150rvahmedsabermohammedali DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 340 DE-600 INTRECHT fid Andrew Ashworth verfasserin aut R. v Ahmed (Saber Mohammed Ali) 2017 Text txt rdacontent ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen n rdamedia Band nc rdacarrier Ashworth reports on R. v Ahmed (Saber Mohammed Ali). In 2006, D was convicted of manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility. The medical reports stated that D was suffering from a severe depressive episode with psychotic symptoms, but that the condition wasn't of a nature or degree that made it appropriate for D to be detained in hospital. Here, Mackay and Ashworth state that the decision in Ahmed is important for three related reasons. First, it appears to depart from the strong skepticism of medical evidence pervading the Vowles judgment. Secondly, the judgment carefully evaluates the two release regimes and, in doing so, makes it clear that, in cases of this type, supervision and eventual release under a s.41 order may well protect the public more effectively than a hospital and limitation direction under s.45A. Thirdly, given the emphasis in Vowles, at (51), on punishment and on penal sentences as "the usual course", this judgment provides an illustration of the circumstances in which a court might properly depart from that course, in favor of public protection through rehabilitation and risk management. Court decisions Mental disorders Criminal sentences Manslaughter Ronnie Mackay oth Enthalten in The criminal law review London : Thomson / Sweet & Maxwell, 1954 (2017), 2, Seite 150 (DE-627)168200694 (DE-600)702179-3 (DE-576)015943658 0011-135X nnns year:2017 number:2 pages:150 http://search.proquest.com/docview/1871486210 GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC FID-INTRECHT SSG-OLC-JUR GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_184 GBV_ILN_2041 GBV_ILN_4306 AR 2017 2 150
allfieldsSound	PQ20170301 (DE-627)OLC1990384323 (DE-599)GBVOLC1990384323 (PRQ)proquest_journals_18714862100 (KEY)0032121420170000000000200150rvahmedsabermohammedali DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 340 DE-600 INTRECHT fid Andrew Ashworth verfasserin aut R. v Ahmed (Saber Mohammed Ali) 2017 Text txt rdacontent ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen n rdamedia Band nc rdacarrier Ashworth reports on R. v Ahmed (Saber Mohammed Ali). In 2006, D was convicted of manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility. The medical reports stated that D was suffering from a severe depressive episode with psychotic symptoms, but that the condition wasn't of a nature or degree that made it appropriate for D to be detained in hospital. Here, Mackay and Ashworth state that the decision in Ahmed is important for three related reasons. First, it appears to depart from the strong skepticism of medical evidence pervading the Vowles judgment. Secondly, the judgment carefully evaluates the two release regimes and, in doing so, makes it clear that, in cases of this type, supervision and eventual release under a s.41 order may well protect the public more effectively than a hospital and limitation direction under s.45A. Thirdly, given the emphasis in Vowles, at (51), on punishment and on penal sentences as "the usual course", this judgment provides an illustration of the circumstances in which a court might properly depart from that course, in favor of public protection through rehabilitation and risk management. Court decisions Mental disorders Criminal sentences Manslaughter Ronnie Mackay oth Enthalten in The criminal law review London : Thomson / Sweet & Maxwell, 1954 (2017), 2, Seite 150 (DE-627)168200694 (DE-600)702179-3 (DE-576)015943658 0011-135X nnns year:2017 number:2 pages:150 http://search.proquest.com/docview/1871486210 GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC FID-INTRECHT SSG-OLC-JUR GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_184 GBV_ILN_2041 GBV_ILN_4306 AR 2017 2 150
language	English
source	Enthalten in The criminal law review (2017), 2, Seite 150 year:2017 number:2 pages:150
sourceStr	Enthalten in The criminal law review (2017), 2, Seite 150 year:2017 number:2 pages:150
format_phy_str_mv	Article
institution	findex.gbv.de
topic_facet	Court decisions Mental disorders Criminal sentences Manslaughter
dewey-raw	340
isfreeaccess_bool	false
container_title	The criminal law review
authorswithroles_txt_mv	Andrew Ashworth @@aut@@ Ronnie Mackay @@oth@@
publishDateDaySort_date	2017-01-01T00:00:00Z
hierarchy_top_id	168200694
dewey-sort	3340
id	OLC1990384323
language_de	englisch
fullrecord	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a2200265 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">OLC1990384323</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230715031658.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">tu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">170303s2017 xx \|\|\|\|\| 00\| \|\|eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="028" ind1="5" ind2="2"><subfield code="a">PQ20170301</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)OLC1990384323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)GBVOLC1990384323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(PRQ)proquest_journals_18714862100</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(KEY)0032121420170000000000200150rvahmedsabermohammedali</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">340</subfield><subfield code="q">DE-600</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">INTRECHT</subfield><subfield code="2">fid</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Andrew Ashworth</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">R. v Ahmed (Saber Mohammed Ali)</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2017</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen</subfield><subfield code="b">n</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Band</subfield><subfield code="b">nc</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Ashworth reports on R. v Ahmed (Saber Mohammed Ali). In 2006, D was convicted of manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility. The medical reports stated that D was suffering from a severe depressive episode with psychotic symptoms, but that the condition wasn't of a nature or degree that made it appropriate for D to be detained in hospital. Here, Mackay and Ashworth state that the decision in Ahmed is important for three related reasons. First, it appears to depart from the strong skepticism of medical evidence pervading the Vowles judgment. Secondly, the judgment carefully evaluates the two release regimes and, in doing so, makes it clear that, in cases of this type, supervision and eventual release under a s.41 order may well protect the public more effectively than a hospital and limitation direction under s.45A. Thirdly, given the emphasis in Vowles, at (51), on punishment and on penal sentences as "the usual course", this judgment provides an illustration of the circumstances in which a court might properly depart from that course, in favor of public protection through rehabilitation and risk management.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Court decisions</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Mental disorders</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Criminal sentences</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Manslaughter</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Ronnie Mackay</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">The criminal law review</subfield><subfield code="d">London : Thomson / Sweet & Maxwell, 1954</subfield><subfield code="g">(2017), 2, Seite 150</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)168200694</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)702179-3</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-576)015943658</subfield><subfield code="x">0011-135X</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">year:2017</subfield><subfield code="g">number:2</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:150</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">http://search.proquest.com/docview/1871486210</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_OLC</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">FID-INTRECHT</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-JUR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_184</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2041</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="j">2017</subfield><subfield code="e">2</subfield><subfield code="h">150</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
author	Andrew Ashworth
spellingShingle	Andrew Ashworth ddc 340 fid INTRECHT misc Court decisions misc Mental disorders misc Criminal sentences misc Manslaughter R. v Ahmed (Saber Mohammed Ali)
authorStr	Andrew Ashworth
ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv	@@773@@(DE-627)168200694
format	Article
dewey-ones	340 - Law
delete_txt_mv	keep
author_role	aut
collection	OLC
remote_str	false
illustrated	Not Illustrated
issn	0011-135X
topic_title	340 DE-600 INTRECHT fid R. v Ahmed (Saber Mohammed Ali) Court decisions Mental disorders Criminal sentences Manslaughter
topic	ddc 340 fid INTRECHT misc Court decisions misc Mental disorders misc Criminal sentences misc Manslaughter
topic_unstemmed	ddc 340 fid INTRECHT misc Court decisions misc Mental disorders misc Criminal sentences misc Manslaughter
topic_browse	ddc 340 fid INTRECHT misc Court decisions misc Mental disorders misc Criminal sentences misc Manslaughter
format_facet	Aufsätze Gedruckte Aufsätze
format_main_str_mv	Text Zeitschrift/Artikel
carriertype_str_mv	nc
author2_variant	r m rm
hierarchy_parent_title	The criminal law review
hierarchy_parent_id	168200694
dewey-tens	340 - Law
hierarchy_top_title	The criminal law review
isfreeaccess_txt	false
familylinks_str_mv	(DE-627)168200694 (DE-600)702179-3 (DE-576)015943658
title	R. v Ahmed (Saber Mohammed Ali)
ctrlnum	(DE-627)OLC1990384323 (DE-599)GBVOLC1990384323 (PRQ)proquest_journals_18714862100 (KEY)0032121420170000000000200150rvahmedsabermohammedali
title_full	R. v Ahmed (Saber Mohammed Ali)
author_sort	Andrew Ashworth
journal	The criminal law review
journalStr	The criminal law review
lang_code	eng
isOA_bool	false
dewey-hundreds	300 - Social sciences
recordtype	marc
publishDateSort	2017
contenttype_str_mv	txt
container_start_page	150
author_browse	Andrew Ashworth
class	340 DE-600 INTRECHT fid
format_se	Aufsätze
author-letter	Andrew Ashworth
dewey-full	340
title_sort	r. v ahmed (saber mohammed ali)
title_auth	R. v Ahmed (Saber Mohammed Ali)
abstract	Ashworth reports on R. v Ahmed (Saber Mohammed Ali). In 2006, D was convicted of manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility. The medical reports stated that D was suffering from a severe depressive episode with psychotic symptoms, but that the condition wasn't of a nature or degree that made it appropriate for D to be detained in hospital. Here, Mackay and Ashworth state that the decision in Ahmed is important for three related reasons. First, it appears to depart from the strong skepticism of medical evidence pervading the Vowles judgment. Secondly, the judgment carefully evaluates the two release regimes and, in doing so, makes it clear that, in cases of this type, supervision and eventual release under a s.41 order may well protect the public more effectively than a hospital and limitation direction under s.45A. Thirdly, given the emphasis in Vowles, at (51), on punishment and on penal sentences as "the usual course", this judgment provides an illustration of the circumstances in which a court might properly depart from that course, in favor of public protection through rehabilitation and risk management.
abstractGer	Ashworth reports on R. v Ahmed (Saber Mohammed Ali). In 2006, D was convicted of manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility. The medical reports stated that D was suffering from a severe depressive episode with psychotic symptoms, but that the condition wasn't of a nature or degree that made it appropriate for D to be detained in hospital. Here, Mackay and Ashworth state that the decision in Ahmed is important for three related reasons. First, it appears to depart from the strong skepticism of medical evidence pervading the Vowles judgment. Secondly, the judgment carefully evaluates the two release regimes and, in doing so, makes it clear that, in cases of this type, supervision and eventual release under a s.41 order may well protect the public more effectively than a hospital and limitation direction under s.45A. Thirdly, given the emphasis in Vowles, at (51), on punishment and on penal sentences as "the usual course", this judgment provides an illustration of the circumstances in which a court might properly depart from that course, in favor of public protection through rehabilitation and risk management.
abstract_unstemmed	Ashworth reports on R. v Ahmed (Saber Mohammed Ali). In 2006, D was convicted of manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility. The medical reports stated that D was suffering from a severe depressive episode with psychotic symptoms, but that the condition wasn't of a nature or degree that made it appropriate for D to be detained in hospital. Here, Mackay and Ashworth state that the decision in Ahmed is important for three related reasons. First, it appears to depart from the strong skepticism of medical evidence pervading the Vowles judgment. Secondly, the judgment carefully evaluates the two release regimes and, in doing so, makes it clear that, in cases of this type, supervision and eventual release under a s.41 order may well protect the public more effectively than a hospital and limitation direction under s.45A. Thirdly, given the emphasis in Vowles, at (51), on punishment and on penal sentences as "the usual course", this judgment provides an illustration of the circumstances in which a court might properly depart from that course, in favor of public protection through rehabilitation and risk management.
collection_details	GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC FID-INTRECHT SSG-OLC-JUR GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_184 GBV_ILN_2041 GBV_ILN_4306
container_issue	2
title_short	R. v Ahmed (Saber Mohammed Ali)
url	http://search.proquest.com/docview/1871486210
remote_bool	false
author2	Ronnie Mackay
author2Str	Ronnie Mackay
ppnlink	168200694
mediatype_str_mv	n
isOA_txt	false
hochschulschrift_bool	false
author2_role	oth
up_date	2024-07-04T00:45:53.976Z
_version_	1803607294845386752
fullrecord_marcxml	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a2200265 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">OLC1990384323</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230715031658.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">tu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">170303s2017 xx \|\|\|\|\| 00\| \|\|eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="028" ind1="5" ind2="2"><subfield code="a">PQ20170301</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)OLC1990384323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)GBVOLC1990384323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(PRQ)proquest_journals_18714862100</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(KEY)0032121420170000000000200150rvahmedsabermohammedali</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">340</subfield><subfield code="q">DE-600</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">INTRECHT</subfield><subfield code="2">fid</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Andrew Ashworth</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">R. v Ahmed (Saber Mohammed Ali)</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2017</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen</subfield><subfield code="b">n</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Band</subfield><subfield code="b">nc</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Ashworth reports on R. v Ahmed (Saber Mohammed Ali). In 2006, D was convicted of manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility. The medical reports stated that D was suffering from a severe depressive episode with psychotic symptoms, but that the condition wasn't of a nature or degree that made it appropriate for D to be detained in hospital. Here, Mackay and Ashworth state that the decision in Ahmed is important for three related reasons. First, it appears to depart from the strong skepticism of medical evidence pervading the Vowles judgment. Secondly, the judgment carefully evaluates the two release regimes and, in doing so, makes it clear that, in cases of this type, supervision and eventual release under a s.41 order may well protect the public more effectively than a hospital and limitation direction under s.45A. Thirdly, given the emphasis in Vowles, at (51), on punishment and on penal sentences as "the usual course", this judgment provides an illustration of the circumstances in which a court might properly depart from that course, in favor of public protection through rehabilitation and risk management.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Court decisions</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Mental disorders</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Criminal sentences</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Manslaughter</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Ronnie Mackay</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">The criminal law review</subfield><subfield code="d">London : Thomson / Sweet & Maxwell, 1954</subfield><subfield code="g">(2017), 2, Seite 150</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)168200694</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)702179-3</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-576)015943658</subfield><subfield code="x">0011-135X</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">year:2017</subfield><subfield code="g">number:2</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:150</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">http://search.proquest.com/docview/1871486210</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_OLC</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">FID-INTRECHT</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-JUR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_184</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2041</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="j">2017</subfield><subfield code="e">2</subfield><subfield code="h">150</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
score	7.403097

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Schreiben Sie uns!

R. v Ahmed (Saber Mohammed Ali)

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Zugang & Verfügbarkeit

Vorhandene Bände

Nicht das Richtige dabei?