§ 3. Mr. Osborneasked the Attorney-General how many psychiatrists are officially employed, either part-time or full-time, in criminal courts; how much they are paid; on what grounds they are appointed; how they can be dismissed; and if he will make a statement.
§ The Attorney-GeneralThe answer to the first part of the Question is, "None". The second, third and fourth parts do not therefore arise. The answer to the fifth part is, "No".
§ Mr. OsborneDoes my right hon. and learned Friend know that I am delighted with these answers? May I have an assurance from him that no public money will be wasted on this type of evidence given in court? In order to support what I am asking him to do, would he be good enough to look at a case which John Gordon mentioned recently in the Sunday Express of a man who strangled his sweetheart—a case in which a psychiatrist said that he was doing it, as it were, by mercy killing? Will he see that such rubbish is not put before the courts at public expense?
§ The Attorney-GeneralDealing with the question of public expense, I am not aware of any waste of money in presenting evidence to the courts. As to receiving evidence from persons called by the defence who are psychiatrists, I certainly would not be in favour of putting any restriction on the evidence given on behalf of the defence.