By RASHAD ROLLE

Tribune Senior Reporter

rrolle@tribunemedia.net

THE Supreme Court yesterday ordered the release of Eric Stubbs, a man who spent 36 years in Sandilands Rehabilitation Centre after he was convicted of rape in 1984.

Earlier this year, the Privy Council ruled the Supreme Court had to decide whether Mr Stubbs should be released or not.

Mr Stubbs was convicted of rape and housebreaking in 1984 and was sentenced to seven years’ imprisonment. He appealed the verdict and in 1985 the Court of Appeal changed the ruling to guilty, but mentally ill. The court ruled he had to be kept at Sandilands until he received an order of discharge from the Governor General.

Last year, the Court of Appeal dismissed his application for leave to apply to the Privy Council on the basis that his confinement was unconstitutional and a breach of his rights.

Mr Stubbs’ lawyer,, Sonia Timothy, said the error in the case concerned the requirement that her client could only be released by an order of the Governor General.

In its ruling, the Privy Council wrote: “The parties should seek directions from the Supreme Court as to the evidence it requires such as psychiatric and social reports to consider the following factors applicable to the question of continuing detention: (a) whether the appellant is suffering from mental disorder of a nature or degree which makes it appropriate for him to be liable to be detained in hospital for medical treatment; or (b) whether it is necessary for the health or safety of the appellant or for the protection of the public that he should receive such treatment.”

 Ms Timothy said: “Mr Stubbs denied rape. There was no medical evidence of rape. He maintained his innocence. He appealed his conviction and sentence. He was not represented at his appeal. On February 27, 1985, the Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and ordered that for the verdict of guilty there be substituted a verdict of guilty, but insane and that for the sentences of seven years imprisonment there be substituted an order that the appellant be conveyed to Sandilands Rehabilitation Centre, there to be kept until discharged by order of the Governor General.”

 Despite the evidence of Dr Michael Neville that he should not be sent to Sandilands, the Court of Appeal ordered his sentence at Sandilands.

 “The accused does suffer from a mental illness … In this case it would be in his interests not to be committed under a hospital order. Our maximum-security unit at Sandilands provides for security under conditions of total incarceration. We have no area in which he could gainfully work or be rehabilitated. The periodic nature of his illness would mean that he would spend long periods locked up when he should be working,” the court said.