R v B [2013] EWCA Crim 823

Court of Appeal

Facts: The defendant (D) was diagnosed with schizophrenia and was convicted of raping his partner. During the trial, the judge directed the jury to disregard D’s mental illness when assessing his belief in the complainant’s consent. The issue was whether D’s mental illness should have been considered in evaluating his understanding of consent and his mens rea.

Held: The Court of Appeal upheld the conviction, finding that the expert evidence did not support the claim that D’s mental illness affected his ability to understand or believe in the complainant’s consent. The mental illness was not deemed relevant to the mens rea assessment in this context.

Key Quote: The Court noted that "mental illness does not automatically affect the assessment of consent unless it impacts the defendant's understanding of consent."

💡Leveluplaw: This case addressed the interaction between mental illness and the assessment of consent, affirming that mental illness alone does not necessarily influence the understanding of consent or the mens rea required for conviction.