Sitting with a single colleague last
month at 1.50p.m. having been told by our legal advisor that we had
an application from a mental health professional under the Mental Health Act s.135 I casually asked whether she had ever been on a
bench which had refused such an application and was unsurprised at
her reply that she had not.
I have posted on my early days on the
bench with senior colleagues virtually rubber stamping entry warrants
by utility companies and police search warrants. My more recent
experiences indicate that with warrants to detain an individual under
the Mental Health Act there is a definite disinclination to refuse
such applications. I can recollect two occasions in the last eighteen
months when, sitting with one other, we agreed that the information
presented was lacking enough weight to allow us to grant the warrant
to detain. Indeed on one of these occasions the applicant was merely
the “message boy” and had no knowledge of the case apart from
what had been written by his colleague which in itself was vague and
mostly hearsay with virtually no medical history. He was advised,
that if the matter were considered so serious, he should have a
colleague with detailed knowledge make a further application ASAP.
I would urge all colleagues to consider
very carefully, as I`m sure most do, such applications which are
usually of high standard and be aware that as in findings of fact at
trial there are certain thresholds to be met; the problem being that
they are often more difficult to determine and upon them hangs a
person`s liberty and our duty of public protection.
I like the valuable info you provide in your articles. I'll bookmark your blog and check
ReplyDeleteagain here frequently. I'm relatively sure I will learn plenty of new stuff
proper here! Good luck for the next!
Take a look at my web blog; Low T Supplement