Douglas Heather
J Law Med. 2015 Dec;23(2):427-42.
While Foetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorders (FASDs) are now a strong focus of policy-makers throughout Australia, they have received strikingly little consideration in Australian criminal courts. Many people who have an FASD are highly suggestible, have difficulty linking their actions to consequences, controlling impulses and remembering things, and thus FASD raises particular issues for appropriate sentencing and the admissibility of evidence. This article considers the approach of Australian criminal courts to FASD. It reviews the recent case of AH v Western Australia which exemplifies the difficulties associated with appropriate sentencing in cases where the accused is likely to have an FASD. The article also considers the implications for Australian courts of the New Zealand case of Pora v The Queen, recently heard by the Privy Council. In this case, the Privy Council accepted expert evidence that people with FASD may confabulate evidence, potentially making their testimony unreliable. The article concludes with an overview of developments in criminal policy and legal response in relation to FASD in the United States, Canada and Australia.
虽然胎儿酒精谱系障碍（FASDs）目前是澳大利亚各地政策制定者的重点关注对象，但在澳大利亚刑事法庭上却极少受到关注。许多患有胎儿酒精谱系障碍的人极易受暗示影响，难以将自己的行为与后果联系起来，难以控制冲动和记忆事情，因此胎儿酒精谱系障碍在适当量刑和证据可采性方面引发了特殊问题。本文探讨了澳大利亚刑事法庭对胎儿酒精谱系障碍的处理方式。它回顾了最近的AH诉西澳大利亚州案，该案例体现了在被告可能患有胎儿酒精谱系障碍的案件中进行适当量刑所面临的困难。本文还考虑了新西兰的波拉诉女王案对澳大利亚法庭产生的影响，枢密院最近审理了此案。在此案中，枢密院接受了专家证据，即患有胎儿酒精谱系障碍的人可能会虚构证据，这可能会使其证词不可靠。文章最后概述了美国、加拿大和澳大利亚在与胎儿酒精谱系障碍相关的刑事政策和法律应对方面的发展情况。
