More

Professor Ronnie Mackay

Job: Professor of Criminal Policy & Mental Health

Faculty: Business and Law

School/department: Leicester De Montfort Law School

Research group(s): Criminal Law and Criminal Justice

Address: The Gateway, De Montfort University, Leicester, UK, LE1 9BH

T: + 44 (0)1162577189

E: rdm@dmu.ac.uk

W: https://www.dmu.ac.uk/bal

 

Close all sections
Open all sections

Personal profile

Ronnie Mackay has a long and distinguished record of research in criminal law and mental health law, with particular emphasis on mental condition defences and mentally abnormal offenders.  He is on the editorial board of the Journal of Forensic Psychiatry and Psychology.  He has a significant record of publications in the leading academic journals in his fields and has acted as an academic consultant to the Law Commission in relation to their work on: Partial Defences to Murder; Murder, Manslaughter and Infanticide; Unfitness to Plead and the Defence of Insanity.  

He has also been engaged in an empirical study for the Law Commission into both unfitness to plead and the defence of insanity as part of the Commission's 10th Reform Programme.  This empirical work is the culmination of a longstanding research project, funded by the Nuffield Foundation, which has also included consideration of both 'diminished responsibility' and the plea of 'provocation'.  He also received funding from the British Epilepsy Association to conduct an empirical study into cases of epileptic automatism which resulted in two publications (with Professor M Reuber). Recently he has conducted an empirical study into the operation of the new diminished responsibility plea with the cooperation of the Crown prosecution Service resulting in three articles in the Criminal Law Review.

In 2018 Professor Mackay jointly edited (with Professor Warren Brookbanks of Auckland University of Technology) a volume entitled Fitness to Plead - International and Comparative Perspectives published by Oxford University Press, see

https://global.oup.com/academic/product/fitness-to-plead-9780198788478?q=Mackay&lang=en&cc=gb#

In 2023 Professor Mackay jointly edited (with Professor Warren Brookbanks of Auckland University of Technology) a volume entitled The Insanity Defence - International and Comparative Perspectives published by Oxford University Press, see

https://global.oup.com/academic/product/the-insanity-defence-9780198854944?cc=gb&lang=en&

Professor Mackay is regularly invited to give papers at national and international conferences and is consulted by a range of stakeholders, for example, he was invited by the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law to comment on their practice guidelines for competence to stand trial.  His articles include a piece on the plea of provocation (with Barry Mitchell and Warren Brookbanks), papers on the operation of both the McNaghten rules (defence of insanity) and unfitness to plead and  empirical studies of involuntary manslaughter cases (with Barry Mitchell) and the new diminished responsibility plea. Professor Mackay is part of the editorial team which produced a major work entitled Principles of Mental Health Law and Policy (Oxford University Press). He has visited Auckland University Law School in New Zealand on several occasions where he taught an intensive Masters course and delivered staff seminars. In 2017 he gve a keynote address at an international conference in New Zealand on Unfitness to Stand Trial see:

 https://naj.aut.ac.nz/past-events/unfitness-to-stand-trial-conference.-perils-and-portents-of-unfitness-to-stand-trial-international-and-comparative-perspectives

In 2018 he gave a presentaton on the role of empirical reserarch in reforming the insanity defence at the 38th Annual congress of the Australia and New Zealand Asscociation of Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, Tasmania, Australia, see; http://www.anzappl2018.com/1980

On September 2019 he gave a  Keynote for the Criminal Justice Group at Annual Conference of SLS at University of Central Lancashire entitled “The Maleficence of M’Naghten OR The Sorry Tale of the Insanity Defence in English Criminal Law.” 

On 23 September 2022 he gave a paper on his empirical research into the insanity defence at the "Mental Disorder, Culpability, and Criminal Law" Joint international research conference organized by the projects DIMENSIONS and Roots of Responsibility at Bergen University.

On 15 June 2023 he gave a lecture entitled "The Operation of the Insanity Defence in England and Wales - A Update ans Some Thoughts about Reform" at the Rethinking Legal Insnaity Conference at UCL.

Research group affiliations

Institute for Law, Justice and Society:

Criminal Law and Justice Research Cluster  

Publications and outputs

  • Case Commentary: Insanity: R. v Usman Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
    dc.title: Case Commentary: Insanity: R. v Usman Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) dc.contributor.author: Mackay, R. dc.description.abstract: A commentary on the Court of Appeal's decision in R v Usman dc.description: Case commentary on the Court of Appeal's decision in R v Usman. The file attached to this record is the author's final peer reviewed version.
  • Infanticide and Diminished Responsibility–Reviewing the Relationship
    dc.title: Infanticide and Diminished Responsibility–Reviewing the Relationship dc.contributor.author: Mackay, R. dc.description.abstract: The relationship between infanticide and the original diminished responsibility plea was examined in depth by the Law Commission in its work on murder, manslaughter and infanticide. As part of its work, that relationship was investigated in my empirical study commissioned by the Law Commission. The Law Commission concluded that , while infanticide should be left unaltered, diminished responsibility should be the subject of reform. In further exploring that relationship this chapter will consider whether and how infanticide may have been impacted by the changes to the diminished responsibility plea which have resulted in a new plea which is markedly different from its earlier counterpart. In doing so , the chapter will discuss recent cases where both infanticide and the new diminished responsibility plea have been pleaded together as a defence strategy. It will be argued that doing so presents a jury with a complex and difficult task when attempting to reach a verdict. The chapter’s conclusion will suggest a possible solution to assist juries in trials of this type.
  • The Insanity Defence in English Law
    dc.title: The Insanity Defence in English Law dc.contributor.author: Mackay, R. dc.description.abstract: This chapter traces the development of the defence of insanity in English law including an analysis of the author's empirical studies into the defence.
  • The Insanity Defence - International and Comparative Perspectives
    dc.title: The Insanity Defence - International and Comparative Perspectives dc.contributor.author: Mackay, R.; Brookbanks, Warren dc.description.abstract: Compares the theory and practice of the insanity defence in a wide variety of common law and civil law jurisdictions, including England, Wales, Scotland, Germany, France, the Netherlands, Norway, Australia, New Zealand, China, Canada, and the United States of America
  • Insanity and blaming the mentally ill - a critique of the prior fault principle in the Law Commission’s discussion paper
    dc.title: Insanity and blaming the mentally ill - a critique of the prior fault principle in the Law Commission’s discussion paper dc.contributor.author: Mackay, R.; Hughes, David dc.description.abstract: In 2013, the Law Commission published important provisional proposals for replacing the current insanity defence with a new special verdict of “not criminally responsible by reason of recognised medical condition”. Despite the passage of time, the proposals are an important starting point for reforming the defence of insanity. One proposal was that the new verdict, unlike the current defence, should be subject to the prior fault principle. This article takes issue with that proposal. We argue that introducing fault and blame into mental illness is unwarranted. We conclude that instead the focus should be on strengthening the disposals available following the special verdict to ensure that suitable help and support is provided while at the same time enhancing public protection by providing that those who reject the support offered may face the prospect of adverse consequences.
  • What’s happening with the reformed diminished responsibility plea?
    dc.title: What’s happening with the reformed diminished responsibility plea? dc.contributor.author: Mackay, R. dc.description.abstract: The reformed section 2 of the Homicide Act 1957 is markedly different from the original provision. Despite this, the ‘official line’ has been that the changes to the plea were merely ones of ‘clarification’ and ‘modernisation’. This article analyses the requirements of the new section 2 in the context of the results of an empirical study into the operation of the new plea carried out by myself and Professor Barry Mitchell. In doing so, it attempts to evaluate the changes which have taken place through an analysis of a sample of 90 cases involving the new plea. The results of the study are discussed in order to assess the validity of the ‘official line’. Is it correct, or have the new elements in section 2 resulted in unintended consequences? dc.description: The file attached to this record is the author's final peer reviewed version. The Publisher's final version can be found by following the DOI link.
  • Explaining the "explanation" requirement in the new diminished responsibility plea
    dc.title: Explaining the "explanation" requirement in the new diminished responsibility plea dc.contributor.author: Mackay, R.; Hughes, David dc.description.abstract: This article, which complements an earlier article, discusses the “explanation” and “causal” provisions in s.2(1) of the Homicide Act 1957 as amended by s.52(1) of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009. The article explores the provenance of those provisions and suggests that, although a legitimate rationale can be identified for the “explanation” provision, it has been superseded by case law relating to the impairment factors in s.2(1). By contrast, the article argues that there was never a legitimate rationale for the “causal” provisions, that those provisions are unnecessary for achieving the stated policy objective, are unprincipled and, because of the drafting, are difficult to interpret and apply. The article concludes by suggesting that the “causal” provisions, being unnecessary to achieve the policy objective, should be interpreted in a way which as far as is possible limits their application. dc.description: The file attached to this record is the author's final peer reviewed version.
  • "Nature", "Quality" and Mens Rea - Some Observations on "Defect of Reason" and the First Limb of the M'Naghten Rules
    dc.title: "Nature", "Quality" and Mens Rea - Some Observations on "Defect of Reason" and the First Limb of the M'Naghten Rules dc.contributor.author: Mackay, R. dc.description.abstract: This article discusses both “defect of reason” and the first limb of the M’Naghten Rules in order to explore the relationship of both to that of general mens rea. In doing so it explores some cases from one of my empirical studies in an attempt to discover more about the application of the first limb and to inquire why these cases came to be dealt with under the Rules rather than simply as ones where D might have been acquitted due to a lack of mens rea. dc.description: The file attached to this record is the author's final peer reviewed version.
  • The M'Naghten Rules - a brief historical note
    dc.title: The M'Naghten Rules - a brief historical note dc.contributor.author: Mackay, R. dc.description.abstract: This paper reveals the number and identities of the signatories to the M'Naghten Rules. However, the paper also confirms that some doubts about this issue remain.
  • Unfitness to Plead-Data on Formal Findings from 2002 to 2014
    dc.title: Unfitness to Plead-Data on Formal Findings from 2002 to 2014 dc.contributor.author: Mackay, R. dc.description.abstract: A study of formal findings of unfitness to plead from 2002 to 2014 for the Law Commission's Final Report on the subject.

View a full listing of Ronnie Mackay's publications and outputs.

Research interests/expertise

Criminal Law, Mental Condition Defences, The Insanity Defence, Unfitness to Plead, Mentally Abnormal Offenders, Mental Health Law, Law and Psychiatry, Medical Law.

Ronnie Mackay has considerable expertise in conducting empirical research into mental condition defences.  To date he has conducted four empirical studies of both the insanity defence and unfitness to plead together with empirical studies of diminished responsibility, provocation and infanticide.  Some of these studies were commissioned by the Law Commission for England and Wales while others have been funded by bodies such as the Economic and Social Research Council and the Nuffield Foundation.  These studies have been used and continue to be used for the purposes of law reform, policy development and legal analysis.

Areas of teaching

Criminal Law; Medical Law.

Qualifications

B.A. (Law); M.Phil; Barrister at Law

Membership of professional associations and societies

Member of Gray’s Inn of Court

Professional licences and certificates

Barrister-at Law

Conference attendance

Conference Papers Given:

Unfitness to Plead – “The Direction of Disability in Relation to the Trial”, Law Commission Conference on Fitness to Plead, London, March 2009. Attendance funded by Conference Organisers.

Guest Lecture on “The New Diminished Responsibility Plea”, Faculty of Forensic Psychiatry Annual Meeting, Royal College of Psychiatrists, 12 February 2010, Dublin. Attendance funded by Conference Organisers.

Keynote Lecture on “Insanity in Jersey Law – A Tale of Two Tests”, Seminar on the Insanity Defences in the Criminal Law of Jersey, 26 February 2010. Attendance funded by Conference Organisers.

2010 Willis Cunningham Memorial Lecture entitled "Researching and Reforming Insanity in the Criminal Law" at Queens University in Kingston, Ontario in Canada on 15th September 2010.

The Coroners and Justice Act 2009: Panacea or Pandora’s Box for Partial Defences?Durham University, 30 September 2010.

Lecture entitled “The New Diminished Responsibility Plea: More than Mere Modernisation?” Univesrity of Northumbria, Attendance funded by Conference Organisers 2010.

Lecture entitled “Unfitness to Plead and the Defence of Insanity” for the Judicial Studies Board for Northern Ireland on 30th November 2010 in Belfast. Attendance funded by Conference Organisers. .

Reforming the Insanity Defence? A Critique of the New Zealand Law Commission’s Report on the Insanity Defence, Paper given as a Visiting Lecturer at Auckland University Law School, February 2011.

Chaired a Session on Reform of the Insanity Defence at Society of Legal Scholars Annual Conference, Cambridge University, September 2011.

Research Presentation on Diminished Responsibility given to the Forensic Section of the Institute of Psychiatry on 16 December 2011.

Insanity Defences in Great Britain, Paper given at the Socio-Legal Studies Association Conference at De Montfort University, April 2012.

'The current law on automatism’, Medico-legal Seminar on Automatism, Keele University, June 14th 2013.

‘Unravelling Unfitness to Plead’, Gerald Gordon Seminar on Criminal Law, Glasgow University, 6-7 June 2013.

‘More Data on the Insanity Defence’ Mental Disorder and Crime Seminar, Northumbria University, 12th October 2013.

Fit to Plead but Unfit to Stand Trial? Society of Legal Scholars Annual Conference, Nottingham University, 11 September 2014.

Insanity and Automatism-The legal State of Play: Sleep and the Law Conference, The Royal Society of Medicine, 30 September 2014.

The Operation of Unfitness to Plead in England and Wales, Perils and Portents of Unfitness to Stand Trial: International and Comparative Perspectives, Auckland University of Technology, New Zealand, 2017.

Insanity defence reform – can empirical research influence legal change? 38th Annual congress of the Australia and New Zealand Asscociation of Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, Tasmania, 2018.

“The Maleficence of M’Naghten OR The Sorry Tale of the Insanity Defence in English Criminal Law” Keynote for the Criminal Justice Group at Annual Conference of SLS at University of Central Lancashire, 3 September 2019.

"The Operation of the Insanity Defence in England and Wales" Lecture at the "Mental Disorder, Culpability, and Criminal Law" Joint international research conference organized by the projects DIMENSIONS and Roots of Responsibility 22 September 2022.

"The Operation of the Insanity Defence in England and Wales - An Update and Some Thoughts about Reform" Lecture at "Rethinking Legal Insanity" Conference at UCL 15 June 2023.

Took part in a Roundtable on "insanity defence across the globe" on 17 August 2023 as part of Bergen Exchages on Law and Social Transformation at University of Bergen.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Consultancy work

Consultant to the Law Commission for their project on reform of Unfitness to Plead and the Defence of Insanity 2011-.

Consultant to the Law Commission for their project on reform of the Law of Murder, 2006.

Consultant to the Law Commission for their project on reform of the Law of Partial Defences to Murder, 2004.

Externally funded research grants information

The Home Office Research and Planning Unit, Research funding to conduct an 18 month study into the operation of section 48 of the Mental Health Act 1983, £48,000, 1995-1996. Project Director.

Economic and Social Research Council, Research Funding to conduct a five year study into the Operation of the Criminal Procedure (Insanity and Unfitness to Plead) Act 1991, £137,577, 1993-1997, Grant No R000233773. Project Director.

The Nuffield Foundation, Unfitness to Plead, Insanity and Diminished Responsibility – An Empirical Study of Three Categories of Mentally Disordered Offender together with Provocation  £149,230, 2003-  Project Director. Co-Investigator Professor B.J. Mitchell of Coventry University.

British Epilepsy Association (Epilepsy Action), Epilepsy and the Defence of Insanity, £5,000, 2007.

Professional esteem indicators

Editorial Board Member of the Journal of Forensic Psychiatry published by Routledge 1992-

Editorial Board Member Personality and Mental Health published by Wiley-Blackwell 1997-2019

Member of the Parole Board for England and Wales 1995-2001

ronnie-mackay