An initial scoping exercise to map out in detail the 'decision tree' underpinning the current situation and proposed reforms, including identification of relevant data and data gaps. The first step in this process would involve Alex Avery spending some time with Nina Hudson at the VLRC to map out the steps in the process. We will provide a short document outlining and explaining this decision tree, and an assessment of our capacity to estimate the cost implication of the proposed reforms, with the available data.

Subject to written confirmation from the VLRC (provided 7-3-14 via electronic mail), we will use all data provided by Nina Hudson to estimate the cost implications of the proposed reforms, using the agreed decision tree. We will produce a short report (approx. 20-25 pages) summarising our findings, and detailing any assumptions and caveats.

Background: Currently if the issue of fitness to stand trial is raised in Victoria, it must be remitted to the County or Supreme Court for the issue to be determined by a jury. It is current law in Victoria that a jury has to make a formal finding as to the fitness of the accused to stand trial, even if both prosecution and defence agree that they are unfit. Only a jury can make this formal finding. If a jury finds that the accused is unfit to stand trial, then the matter is sent to a new jury for a special hearing.
Some other jurisdictions have removed the requirement for a jury and decided that the finding can be made if prosecution and defence agree, or given a judge alone the power to decide it. In Victoria, a proposal for enabling the Magistrates' Court to examine questions of fitness to stand trial is being examined by the VLRC. This proposal is the subject of our analysis.