Facts
The SCC examined a case involving an individual accused of multiple offenses, including exploitation of a distress situation and various forms of sexual coercion. The accused, presenting himself as a spiritual master, exploited the vulnerability of several women to establish dependency relationships and commit criminal acts. The cantonal court ordered an outpatient therapeutic measure after evaluating the psychiatric expert reports.
The accused contested the validity of the psychiatric expertise, arguing that it was based solely on files and not on a personal assessment. He also contested the notion of "serious mental disorder" used to justify the therapeutic measure, arguing that his mental disorder was moderate according to the experts.
Considerations
The SCC first examined the validity of the psychiatric expertise based solely on the case files. According to Art. 184 ss CrimPC, it is primarily the responsibility of the appointed expert to assess whether an expertise based solely on the files can exceptionally answer the questions posed. The court concluded that, although the expertise was not based on a personal assessment, it was nevertheless valid because the accused refused to submit to a personal expertise, which limited the options available to the experts.
Next, the court addressed the question of the notion of "serious mental disorder" under Art. 59 SCC and Art. 63 SCC. The court emphasized that this notion is of a legal nature and is not always equivalent to the therapeutic assessment. In this case, although…