35 On behalf of the appellant it is argued that, as the period during which he has been in one form of custody or another since the stabbing is already sufficient loss of liberty as a punishment for that stabbing, the interests of justice would be served better by an acquittal and release into the community. However, his counsel in this appeal very realistically conceded that, even if the appellant had not been charged, he was at the time of the stabbing clearly suffering from a mental illness, that he is still in that condition (although to a lesser extent), and that he would have been in some form of civil detention throughout the whole of that time. In those circumstances, the interests of justice do not, in my view, require an acquittal and release into the community, even on condition that the appellant is to be made an involuntary patient under the Mental Health Act.
36 On the other hand, the Crown has applied for orders pursuant to s 7(4) of the Criminal Appeal Act, which provides:
If, on any appeal, it appears to the court that, although the appellant committed the act or made the omission charged against the appellant, the appellant was mentally ill, so as not to be responsible, according to law, for the appellant's action at the time when the act was done or omission made, the court may quash the conviction and sentence passed at the trial and order that the appellant be detained in strict custody in such place and in such manner as the court thinks fit until released by due process of law or may make such other order (including an order releasing the appellant from custody, either unconditionally or subject to conditions) as the court considers appropriate.