Fitness to plead and stand trial — unlawfully in a building — ill-treating a cat — indecency with a cat — Criminal Procedure (Mentally Impaired Persons) Act 2003, ss 9, 14, 23, 24 & 25 — SR v R [2011] NZCA 409. The young person, FP, faced charges of being unlawfully in a building, ill-treating a cat and committing an indecency with a cat. The Judge had to decide whether FP was fit to stand plead and stand trial on the charges under the Criminal Procedure (Mentally Impaired Persons) Act ("the Act"). Under s 9 of the Act, the Judge had to be satisfied on the balance of probabilities that the evidence sufficiently established FP's involvement in the offences. Next, the Judge had to determine whether FP was mentally impaired and finally whether any impairment made FP unfit to stand trial. Each of the charges were based on witness testimony. One witness had found out FP was sneaking into her house to play with a game console. Another woke when he heard a cat making a strange sound to see FP physically and sexually assaulting a cat. FP also admitted the offending to police officers. The Judge was satisfied on the balance of probabilities that FP was involved in the offending. Mental impairment is not defined in the Act. The Court of Appeal had defined it as a disorder or condition affecting the rationality of an accused to an extent that may compromise their fitness to stand trial. This could include a mental disorder, intellectual disability, cognitive defects, functional disorders or other impairment, for example brain injury. In determining whether FP was mentally impaired, two experts assessed FP and made reports. It was found his IQ fell into a very low range and he showed high scores on the Trauma Checklist for children. It was concluded he was a vulnerable young person with an intellectual disability, significant pyschological and behavioural difficulties and an inability to deal with his own childhood trauma (which included being sexually abused). This mental impairment made FP unfit to plead and stand trial and no assistance could be given to help facilitate a trial that would nullify the impairment. The Judge concluded FP was unfit to stand trial. Help for FP was necessary to stop him re-offending and to aid him in dealing with his childhood trauma. It was directed that inquiries be made under s 23 of the Act to determine the best course of action to take in relation to FP. Judgment Date: 1 August 2018. * * * Note: Names have been changed to comply with legal requirements * * *