In 2011, two devastating, unprovoked attacks took place in south London which gave rise to a number of issues of interest, for those following this website. Nicola Edgington was subsequently convicted of murder and attempted murder, for her attacks on Sally Hodkin and Kerry Clark and imprisoned. She was subsequently transferred to Rampton high secure hospital in Nottinghamshire where she remained for many years but I’m told she has now been transferred back to the prison system to complete her sentence. She was sentenced to live with a minimum tariff of 37-years.
You can find detail and many hyperlinks to specific reports and media coverage on a previous post of mine.
There are various points of interest —
- This was not the first time Nicola had killed someone — in 2006 she pleaded guilty to manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility after killing her own mother the year before.
- She was sentenced to a restricted hospital order and remained in a medium secure unit for over three years before being discharged. Nicola’s discharge after such a brief period is often cited as the basis for fearing that other patients given a restricted hospital order may also be “out” too soon after being sentenced for killing someone.
- After the attacks on Sally and Kerry, various reviews took place including by the Independent Office for Police Conduct because there had been police and NHS contact immediately prior to the attacks and the IOPC found no fault with the officers’ actions, nor did the Coroner when Sally’s inquest took place.
- However, the independent care review in to Nicola’s care did attempt to find fault with the police’s actions and their proposed report ended up being subject to the Metropolitan Police seeking judicial review proceedings. Eventually, that was resolved without court process after the NHS made amendment to its report.
NEW POINT OF INTEREST
Nicola Edgington, now known by the name Nicole Thomas, has had her murder trial and conviction reviewed by the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC). This body looks at cases where there may be cause to think the original court process reached a conclusion which may no longer be considered “safe”, for example, because new forensic evidence becomes available after developments in technology. In Nicole’s case, questions have been raised about the original psychiatric evidence and new reports are available.
After the attacks in 2011, Nicole was charged with murder and attempted murder. As the trial date approach, she pleaded guilty to manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility, just as she had after her mother’s killing in 2006. For a number of reasons to do with the psychiatric evidence, a trial was held and the question of whether Nicole’s actions amounted to murder or manslaughter was left to the jury. Of course, they were given access to the psychiatric evidence which included suggestion that her diagnosis in 2006 had been incorrect and a new diagnosis reached along with a revision of what this was thought to mean for her treatment and for the legal issues at play during the trial. Having heard all of this, the jury found her guilty of murder, as well as the attempted murder of Kerry Clark.
Now, psychiatric evidence has been adduced by the CCRC which suggests the jury were not given the full picture. The CCRC website release on this states —
“After conducting a series of complex and lengthy investigations, the CCRC has called into question key aspects of the medical and psychiatric evidence in the prosecution case against Ms Thomas. Its fresh psychiatric report identified that the jury had not been made aware of important aspects of the earlier evidence, which gave the jury a misleading impression of Ms Thomas’s mental health.”
For the avoidance of all doubt: this is not an appeal to suggest she is not guilty of anything – it is a process to suggest one criminal conviction be replaced by another.
WHAT HAPPENS NOW
In due course, the Court of Appeal will review the evidence and reach a view about the matters being “called into question” and it can take a number of decisions.
- They could find the new psychiatric evidence offers nothing new or doesn’t affect the trial proceedings from 2013 and the original decision stands.
- The could find the original proceedings were potentially affected by the new reports and order an re-trial.
- They could conclude the original proceedings are affected by the new reports and insert a new outcome.
No timescale is given for the Court of Appeal hearing but it might be worth noting the review of psychiatric evidence was commissioned in 2016, so it’s taken about eight years to get this far.
In terms of Nicole’s status now: she remains a convicted prisoner and any decisions about her are governed by prison or criminal justice rules through the Parole board so nothing could happen until 37-years after the trial unless the CCRC / Court of Appeal process does suggest the murder conviction is unsafe. If that leads to her conviction being down-graded to manslaughter, it will have to lead to re-sentencing for that offence. It would involve a full re-sentencing process in accordance with the manslaughter and mentally disordered offender sentencing guidelines. The maximum sentence for manslaughter is a life sentence and given it would be a second homicide conviction, we could expect that to be towards the upper end of things.
One to watch, not least because of how rare such things are and how much we might imagine public confidence could be affected by all of this, notwithstanding the legal and medical reality.
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 