A Crown Court judge at Nottingham Crown Court will most likely hand down a sentence for Valdo Calocane on Thursday 25th January after his admission of manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility (DR) and attempted murder in the city in June 2023. Day two of the sentencing hearing has been going on all day and the judge has been hearing from expert psychiatric witnesses about the implications of various options. Wherever someone is convicted of manslaughter (DR), it remains an option to imprison them, just as anyone else would be likely to face imprisonment if convicted of similar crimes. But manslaughter (DR) means there is a significant mental health element to the offending and it is in that context the judge will have to decide whether or not an order under the Mental Health Act 1983 may be more appropriate.
There are two order in particular which are likely to be the end result here —
- A restricted hospital order, under section 37/41 MHA.
- A hybrid order, under section 45A MHA.
Today’s evidence has included opinion from Dr Nigel BLackwood, professor of forensic psychiatry at King’s College, London and he seems to have discounted the potential of a hybrid order being relevant here. It’s worth understanding why he might argue this.
HYBRID ORDERS
Where s45A is used it means the defendant will be given a custodial sentence of a specified number of years in prison but then removed or returned to a psychiatric hospital for treatment of his condition. Once doctors are satisfied he is medically suitable for discharge from hospital, he would then be transferred to the prison system to complete his sentence as normal. For example, if given twenty years in prison and then having spent ten years in hospital, he would serve ten years in prison and Parole Board processes would govern his release and the Probation service would supervise him in the community after any release. However, if he had remained seriouslly mentally unwell for the duration of his twenty year criminal sentence, he would not serve time in prison but would remain detained under the MHA in hospital until his treatment was thought complete.
Professor Blackwood points out, if his sentence is conceived as treatment then prison, there is a risk he will then disengage from taking medication which may be thought necessary becasue the MHA does not apply in prison and prisoners cannot be compelled to take psychiatric drugs. Of course, whilst in prison he could be transferred back to hospital for this purpose – under s47 MHA – but that’s a lot of administrative business to contend with. Professor Blackwell has reminded the court, Mr Calocane’s history in the three years prior to the killings involved multiple episodes of disengagement from services, lies about treatment compliance and evidence he wasn’t taking medication. The professor has cautioned the court of the potential for further fatal consequences.
This makes me think the evidence is pushing towards a restricted hospital order – and we should find out tomorrow morning, the 25th January. This is the longest-lasting order under the MHA and it’s sometimes referred to as an ‘indefinite’ order – it means a defendant is transferred to a secure mental health unit at completion of the sentencing hearing and s/he remains there until the psychiatrists in charge of care regard treatment as concluded. It also means the Secretary of State for Justice, through the MoJ’s mental health unit, authorise and oversee the doctors caring then discharging him and the supervision regime after discharge is under the MHA, not the criminal justice system. It’s called conditional discharge and it means patients can easily be returned to hospital, if necessary.
COULD HAVE DONE MORE
Today’s evidence also included Assistant Chief Constable Rob Griffin from Nottinghamshire Police who has personally reviewed the police contacts with Mr Calocane between 2020-2022. He outlined more of what we heard yesterday about police involvement in arresting him for offences and supporting the NHS in transporting him, including in September 2021 where the police executed a warrant under s135(1) MHA for assessment. During conveyance to hospital, an officer was assaulted and this led, in August 2022, to a summons to appear in court in September 2022. Having failed to show up, a court warrant was issued for his non-appearance and it remained un-actioned in June 2023 when he was arrested for the killings and attempted killings in Nottingham.
Mr Griffin stated —
“I can confirm that Nottinghamshire Police previously engaged with the suspect, mostly while supporting our colleagues in the NHS on a number of occasions between 2020 and 2022. In September 2021, we were requested to support a Section 135 warrant to section the suspect under the Mental Health Act. We transported the suspect to Highbury Hospital and during this encounter he assaulted one of our police officers. In August 2022, he was reported for summons and was due to attend court on 22 September 2022 for the assault on our officer.
He failed to appear on that occasion and a warrant for his arrest was issued in September 2022. The defendant was never arrested for that warrant which was still outstanding at the point of his arrest in June 2023. I have personally reviewed this matter and we should have done more to arrest him. However, because of the circumstance prevailing, at the time of the alleged assault, in my opinion it is highly unlikely that he would have received a custodial sentence. Of course, an arrest might have triggered a route back into mental health services, but as we have seen from his previous encounters with those services, it seems unlikely that he would have engaged in this process.”
This has been a long sentencing hearing, reflecting the gravity and seriousness of what has occurred here and I’m relieved for the victims’ families it is due to end soon with at least some kind of closure, even if only closure of the criminal proceedings. It’s worth remembering: there will have to be inquests for all three victims in due course, so whilst criminal proceedings may be coming to an end, legal proceedings are far from over and there will no doubt be reviews in to Mr Calocane NHS care and handling by the police.
“We should have done more” reverberates now someone’s said it out loud.
My post from day one of sentencing is available; as is a detailed timeline of events between 2020-2022.
NB: this is the latest in post about the terrible events in Nottingham, June 2023. You can find all the others collated on a specific Nottingham resources page along with other materials, inc reports and legal documents.
Winner of the President’s Medal, the Royal College of Psychiatrists.
Winner of the Mind Digital Media Award
All opinions expressed are my own – they do not represent the views of any organisation. (c) Michael Brown, 2024
I try to keep this blog up to date, but inevitably over time, amendments to the law as well as court rulings and other findings from inquests and complaints processes mean it is difficult to ensure all the articles and pages remain current. Please ensure you check all legal issues in particular and take appropriate professional advice where necessary.
Government legislation website – www.legislation.gov.uk
Mental Health Cop 