17 April 2024 Keith Rix 846 Case Updates R v Valdo Calocane, The Crown Court at Nottingham, 25 January 2024, unreported byKeith Rix The case of Valdo Calocane, convicted of diminished responsibility manslaughter, has brought to the public’s attention the role of expert psychiatric witnesses in cases of alleged murder. The context has been, and will be for some time, the intense public interest in the horrific killing of three people and the attempted murder of three others, all unknown to the offender, in Nottingham. The case raises a number of issues about the role of expert witnesses in criminal proceedings, mental condition defences and the meaning of public interest. To continue reading you must be an EWI member, become a member and access exclusive content. Already a member? Login More links Link to the HMCPSI Report Share Print Tags PsychiatryDuty to the courtInterviewing witnessesPublic interest05. Rules and Regulations10. Report Writing14. Giving Oral Evidence Related articles Is it within the remit of an expert to decide which witness of fact they believe or disbelieve? When the joint statement is no more than really two statements, one from each expert. The dangers of a considerable burden of expert work Preliminary (pre-report) experts’ meetings A Day in the Life of a Medicolegal Expert Witness Switch article The EWI’s view on the Civil Procedure Rule Committee Court Documents Consultation Previous Article Appeal in the Cause Michael Marshall against Berkshire Hathaway International Insurance Company Limited [2024] SAC (Civ) 13 Next Article Comments are only visible to subscribers.