I suffer from a social anxiety disorder which I am embarrassed about.
I have never seen a GP about it as I can self manage it and I know
there is nothing a GP could do to cure it. I have tried self help
articles on the internet but they do not seem to help. This disorder
is an excellent defence for a crime I have been alleged of committing.
The problem is how can I prove this on the 'balance of probabilities'?
Will my word that I have the disorder be sufficient?

On Nov 4, 1:45 pm, ICC  wrote:
> I suffer from a social anxiety disorder which I am embarrassed about.
> I have never seen a GP about it as I can self manage it and I know
> there is nothing a GP could do to cure it. I have tried self help
> articles on the internet but they do not seem to help. This disorder
> is an excellent defence for a crime I have been alleged of committing.
> The problem is how can I prove this on the 'balance of probabilities'?
> Will my word that I have the disorder be sufficient?

the burden is some what different in criminal matters, you might look
to "beyond reasonable doubt"

ICC wrote:
> I suffer from a social anxiety disorder which I am embarrassed about.
> I have never seen a GP about it as I can self manage it and I know
> there is nothing a GP could do to cure it. I have tried self help
> articles on the internet but they do not seem to help. This disorder
> is an excellent defence for a crime I have been alleged of committing.
> The problem is how can I prove this on the 'balance of probabilities'?
> Will my word that I have the disorder be sufficient?

Possibly, but really you'll need a medical expert - perhaps a psychologist 
or psychiatrist. You describe your symptoms and the expert says how that 
fits in with the defence.

Any reason you don't have a lawyer?

-- 
Take it easy on the kid, SilverFox316; everybody kills Hitler on their
first trip.

On 4 Nov, 15:05, Jane  wrote:
> On Nov 4, 1:45 pm, ICC  wrote:
>
> > I suffer from a social anxiety disorder which I am embarrassed about.
> > I have never seen a GP about it as I can self manage it and I know
> > there is nothing a GP could do to cure it. I have tried self help
> > articles on the internet but they do not seem to help. This disorder
> > is an excellent defence for a crime I have been alleged of committing.
> > The problem is how can I prove this on the 'balance of probabilities'?
> > Will my word that I have the disorder be sufficient?
>
> the burden is some what different in criminal matters, you might look
> to "beyond reasonable doubt"

The burden on the defendant in a criminal trial is to prove a defence
'on the balance of probabilities'. It is for the prosecution to
disprove the defence 'beyond reasonable doubt'. I'm just wondering if
my word would be good enough to prove on the 'balance of
probabilities' that I have the disorder?

On 4 Nov, 13:45, ICC  wrote:
> I suffer from a social anxiety disorder which I am embarrassed about.
> I have never seen a GP about it as I can self manage it and I know
> there is nothing a GP could do to cure it. I have tried self help
> articles on the internet but they do not seem to help. This disorder
> is an excellent defence for a crime I have been alleged of committing.
> The problem is how can I prove this on the 'balance of probabilities'?
> Will my word that I have the disorder be sufficient?

Social anxiety disorder usually just means you tick the boxes for some
of a variety of symptoms and it is very varied in the severity,
situations and conditions in which it affects people. It would need
some demonstrable history of symptoms, diagnosis treatment, and/or
some current expert psychiatric diagnosis and opinion of its severity
and relevance to the type or circumstances of the crime, before a
court would take it into consideration.

Toom

ICC wrote:

> I suffer from a social anxiety disorder which I am embarrassed about.
> I have never seen a GP about it as I can self manage it and I know
> there is nothing a GP could do to cure it. I have tried self help
> articles on the internet but they do not seem to help. This disorder
> is an excellent defence for a crime I have been alleged of committing.

IANAL ...

Did you actually commit the crime?

> The problem is how can I prove this on the 'balance of probabilities'?
> Will my word that I have the disorder be sufficient?

I would think that if you tried that then your medical history might
have to be checked and taken into account.  With no medical history
suporting your argument it might be a little risky.

-- 
Paul - xxx

'96/'97 Landrover Discovery 300 Tdi
Dyna Tech Cro-Mo comp

ICC wrote:

> On 4 Nov, 15:05, Jane  wrote:
> > On Nov 4, 1:45 pm, ICC  wrote:
> > 
> > > I suffer from a social anxiety disorder which I am embarrassed
> > > about.  I have never seen a GP about it as I can self manage it
> > > and I know there is nothing a GP could do to cure it. I have
> > > tried self help articles on the internet but they do not seem
> > > to help. This disorder is an excellent defence for a crime I
> > > have been alleged of committing.  The problem is how can I
> > > prove this on the 'balance of probabilities'?  Will my word
> > > that I have the disorder be sufficient?
> > 
> > the burden is some what different in criminal matters, you might
> > look to "beyond reasonable doubt"
> 
> The burden on the defendant in a criminal trial is to prove a
> defence 'on the balance of probabilities'. It is for the
> prosecution to disprove the defence 'beyond reasonable doubt'. I'm
> just wondering if my word would be good enough to prove on the
> 'balance of probabilities' that I have the disorder?

There is no burden on the defendant to prove anything in a criminal
case , its up to the prosecution to prove beyond reasonable doubt
guilt

In a civil case its up to the plaintiff to prove on the balance of
probabilities again the defence to not have to prove anything

On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 17:35:06 퍍, "steve robinson"
 wrote:

>ICC wrote:
>
>> On 4 Nov, 15:05, Jane  wrote:
>> > On Nov 4, 1:45 pm, ICC  wrote:
>> > 
>> > > I suffer from a social anxiety disorder which I am embarrassed
>> > > about.  I have never seen a GP about it as I can self manage it
>> > > and I know there is nothing a GP could do to cure it. I have
>> > > tried self help articles on the internet but they do not seem
>> > > to help. This disorder is an excellent defence for a crime I
>> > > have been alleged of committing.  The problem is how can I
>> > > prove this on the 'balance of probabilities'?  Will my word
>> > > that I have the disorder be sufficient?
>> > 
>> > the burden is some what different in criminal matters, you might
>> > look to "beyond reasonable doubt"
>> 
>> The burden on the defendant in a criminal trial is to prove a
>> defence 'on the balance of probabilities'. It is for the
>> prosecution to disprove the defence 'beyond reasonable doubt'. I'm
>> just wondering if my word would be good enough to prove on the
>> 'balance of probabilities' that I have the disorder?
>
>There is no burden on the defendant to prove anything in a criminal
>case , its up to the prosecution to prove beyond reasonable doubt
>guilt
>
Wrong. the above is the general rule, but many statutory defences must
be proved by the defendant. In such a case the provision specifying
the defence will say "the burden of proof whereof shall be on him"; if
it doesn't say that, it remains on the prosecution.

-- 
Don Aitken
Mail to the From: address is not read.
To email me, substitute "clara.co.uk" for "freeuk.com"

On 4 Nov, 13:45, ICC  wrote:
> I suffer from a social anxiety disorder which I am embarrassed about.
> I have never seen a GP about it as I can self manage it and I know
> there is nothing a GP could do to cure it. I have tried self help
> articles on the internet but they do not seem to help. This disorder
> is an excellent defence for a crime I have been alleged of committing.
> The problem is how can I prove this on the 'balance of probabilities'?
> Will my word that I have the disorder be sufficient?

You know it's funny I've just answered your other post in which I said
"I'm think you did it", and by miraculous chance this is the next post
I've looked at and now I'm quite sure you're guilty.

On 4 Nov, 15:35, ICC  wrote:
> On 4 Nov, 15:05, Jane  wrote:
>
> > On Nov 4, 1:45 pm, ICC  wrote:
>
> > > I suffer from a social anxiety disorder which I am embarrassed about.
> > > I have never seen a GP about it as I can self manage it and I know
> > > there is nothing a GP could do to cure it. I have tried self help
> > > articles on the internet but they do not seem to help. This disorder
> > > is an excellent defence for a crime I have been alleged of committing> > > The problem is how can I prove this on the 'balance of probabilities'> > > Will my word that I have the disorder be sufficient?
>
> > the burden is some what different in criminal matters, you might look
> > to "beyond reasonable doubt"
>
> The burden on the defendant in a criminal trial is to prove a defence
> 'on the balance of probabilities'. It is for the prosecution to
> disprove the defence 'beyond reasonable doubt'. I'm just wondering if
> my word would be good enough to prove on the 'balance of
> probabilities' that I have the disorder?

Your word alone would not be good enough. It would need expert
evidence of diagnosis of the existence and extent of the condition and
it's likely contibution to the offence.

In addition, your statement that you can 'self manage' the condition
may be at variance with your claim that it is responsible for, or is a
defence for the commision of, the offence.

Claim to know about the condition might also be seen as at variance
with your statement that a GP could do nothing to help, so you did not
consult one.
A 'cure' may be problematic but  a GP can either treat or refer for
treatment any severe case of social anxiety disorder, and the symptoms
can be considerably alleviated. It can be treated by several
pharmocological means and/or referred to specialists and treated with
several options of cognitive/psychological techniques. It might be
difficult to base a defence on claiming to know about the conditon and
it's effect on you, and yet doing nothing about seeking known
available professional help and treatment despite it becoming severe
enough to apparently account for your involvement in a crime.

Toom

Don Aitken wrote:

> On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 17:35:06 퍍, "steve robinson"
>  wrote:
> 
> > ICC wrote:
> > 
> >> On 4 Nov, 15:05, Jane  wrote:
> >> > On Nov 4, 1:45 pm, ICC  wrote:
> >> > 
> >> > > I suffer from a social anxiety disorder which I am
> embarrassed >> > > about.  I have never seen a GP about it as I can
> self manage it >> > > and I know there is nothing a GP could do to
> cure it. I have >> > > tried self help articles on the internet but
> they do not seem >> > > to help. This disorder is an excellent
> defence for a crime I >> > > have been alleged of committing.  The
> problem is how can I >> > > prove this on the 'balance of
> probabilities'?  Will my word >> > > that I have the disorder be
> sufficient?  >> > 
> >> > the burden is some what different in criminal matters, you
> might >> > look to "beyond reasonable doubt"
> >> 
> >> The burden on the defendant in a criminal trial is to prove a
> >> defence 'on the balance of probabilities'. It is for the
> >> prosecution to disprove the defence 'beyond reasonable doubt'.
> I'm >> just wondering if my word would be good enough to prove on
> the >> 'balance of probabilities' that I have the disorder?
> > 
> > There is no burden on the defendant to prove anything in a
> > criminal case , its up to the prosecution to prove beyond
> > reasonable doubt guilt
> > 
> Wrong. the above is the general rule, but many statutory defences
> must be proved by the defendant. In such a case the provision
> specifying the defence will say "the burden of proof whereof shall
> be on him"; if it doesn't say that, it remains on the prosecution.


We were talking generally ,statutory defences are very specific in
nature  i.e yes i killed him ,but i acted in self defence .

The prosecution can prove beyond reasonable doubt you did kill him (
you admitted too it)
you have to prove your action was legal  

If the prosecution couldnt prove then there would be no need for the
statutory defence

In its simplest form

ICC wrote:
> I suffer from a social anxiety disorder which I am embarrassed about.
> I have never seen a GP about it as I can self manage it and I know
> there is nothing a GP could do to cure it. I have tried self help
> articles on the internet but they do not seem to help. This disorder
> is an excellent defence for a crime I have been alleged of committing.
> The problem is how can I prove this on the 'balance of probabilities'?
> Will my word that I have the disorder be sufficient?

You appear to be clutching at a series of increasingly desperate and flimsy 
straws.

No UK court would accept a defendant's "wikipedia self-diagnosis" of a 
disorder which indemnifies them against responsibility for criminal conduct. 
They would want some objective independent evidence of it's prior existence 
(eg through GP's notes or disability benefit) and/or an expert report by a 
psychiatrist.    Even then it would be likely to provide mitigation, not an 
absolute defence.

Can I suggest that you go out tomorrow and arrange for a lawyer to advise 
and represent you.

Ste wrote:
> On 4 Nov, 13:45, ICC  wrote:
>> I suffer from a social anxiety disorder which I am embarrassed about.
>> I have never seen a GP about it as I can self manage it and I know
>> there is nothing a GP could do to cure it. I have tried self help
>> articles on the internet but they do not seem to help. This disorder
>> is an excellent defence for a crime I have been alleged of committing.
>> The problem is how can I prove this on the 'balance of probabilities'?
>> Will my word that I have the disorder be sufficient?
>
> You know it's funny I've just answered your other post in which I said
> "I'm think you did it", and by miraculous chance this is the next post
> I've looked at and now I'm quite sure you're guilty.

Quite possibly, but making direct accusations of this nature is not 
consistent with the collegiate style of the group.

On 4 Nov, 13:45, ICC wrote:
> I suffer from a social anxiety disorder which I am embarrassed about.
> ...  This disorder
> is an excellent defence for a crime I have been alleged of committing.

Is this a defence that you didn't do the act, or that you did the act
but because of your medical condition you doing the act is not a
crime?

E.g. if you never travel on tube trains because you're claustrophobic,
and you want to use that as a defence against a charge of committing a
robbery on a tube train, then you can tell the court that, and line up
any number of people you can find who know you and will say "ICC has
never travelled on a tube train in all the years I've known him, every
time we go to the pub we have to go by bus" then your claim simply
strengthens a factual defence of misidentification.

If, however, you were on the tube train and want to claim that you
were so overcome by reason of your claustrophobia that you committed
the crime whilst suffering temporary insanity, you are going to need
some  very convincing medical evidence and a jolly good lawyer.

IANAL

Owain

On Nov 4, 10:30 pm, Owain  wrote:
> On 4 Nov, 13:45, ICC wrote:
>
> > I suffer from a social anxiety disorder which I am embarrassed about.
> > ...  This disorder
> > is an excellent defence for a crime I have been alleged of committing.
>
> Is this a defence that you didn't do the act, or that you did the act
> but because of your medical condition you doing the act is not a
> crime?
>
> E.g. if you never travel on tube trains because you're claustrophobic,
> and you want to use that as a defence against a charge of committing a
> robbery on a tube train, then you can tell the court that, and line up
> any number of people you can find who know you and will say "ICC has
> never travelled on a tube train in all the years I've known him, every
> time we go to the pub we have to go by bus" then your claim simply
> strengthens a factual defence of misidentification.
>
> If, however, you were on the tube train and want to claim that you
> were so overcome by reason of your claustrophobia that you committed
> the crime whilst suffering temporary insanity, you are going to need
> some  very convincing medical evidence and a jolly good lawyer.
>
> IANAL
>
> Owain

Thanks for your advice Steve. I have made an appointment to see a
solicitor. I have been trying to do this myself as my budget is tight
and will find it hard to fund my defence and must admit I have been
getting myself tied up in knots.

Ste - just for the record I came to this group for advice, not
judgement. Your comments have made me wary of divulging too much
detail for that reason. I will accept an apology if you offer one. The
case is one persons word against another's. I have been accused of a
crime. I have denied this. The victim is the only witness and there is
forensics.

On Nov 5, 9:00 am, ICC  wrote:
> On Nov 4, 10:30 pm, Owain  wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 4 Nov, 13:45, ICC wrote:
>
> > > I suffer from a social anxiety disorder which I am embarrassed about.
> > > ...  This disorder
> > > is an excellent defence for a crime I have been alleged of committing> > Is this a defence that you didn't do the act, or that you did the act
> > but because of your medical condition you doing the act is not a
> > crime?
>
> > E.g. if you never travel on tube trains because you're claustrophobic,
> > and you want to use that as a defence against a charge of committing a
> > robbery on a tube train, then you can tell the court that, and line up
> > any number of people you can find who know you and will say "ICC has
> > never travelled on a tube train in all the years I've known him, every
> > time we go to the pub we have to go by bus" then your claim simply
> > strengthens a factual defence of misidentification.
>
> > If, however, you were on the tube train and want to claim that you
> > were so overcome by reason of your claustrophobia that you committed
> > the crime whilst suffering temporary insanity, you are going to need
> > some  very convincing medical evidence and a jolly good lawyer.
>
> > IANAL
>
> > Owain
>
> Thanks for your advice Steve. I have made an appointment to see a
> solicitor. I have been trying to do this myself as my budget is tight
> and will find it hard to fund my defence and must admit I have been
> getting myself tied up in knots.
>
> Ste - just for the record I came to this group for advice, not
> judgement. Your comments have made me wary of divulging too much
> detail for that reason. I will accept an apology if you offer one. The
> case is one persons word against another's. I have been accused of a
> crime. I have denied this. The victim is the only witness and there is
> forensics.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Sorry, i meant there are NO forensics

ICC wrote:
>
> Thanks for your advice Steve. I have made an appointment to see a
> solicitor. I have been trying to do this myself as my budget is tight
> and will find it hard to fund my defence and must admit I have been
> getting myself tied up in knots.

You can check whether you would be eligible for legal aid here:
http://www.legalservices.gov.uk/criminal/getting_legal_aid/eligibility_calculator.asp


>
> Ste - just for the record I came to this group for advice, not
> judgement. Your comments have made me wary of divulging too much
> detail for that reason.

If it's any help, I have no clue what you are being accused of, whether you 
did it, or whether you have some kind of statutory defence. I have no idea 
how other people jump to their conclusions.

However, more importantly, if there is any chance at all that you could be 
identified from your posts, I would not post information that could 
conceivably be of value to the prosecution.

I am delighted to hear that you are going to a solicitor.





-- 
Take it easy on the kid, SilverFox316; everybody kills Hitler on their
first trip.

On 5 Nov, 09:00, ICC  wrote:
>
> Ste - just for the record I came to this group for advice, not
> judgement. Your comments have made me wary of divulging too much
> detail for that reason. I will accept an apology if you offer one.

Apologies.