Simon’s Law: what Simon Byrne’s case tells us about justice for abuse survivors

In this blog, Leigh Day partner Dino Nocivelli considers whether the current legal framework strikes the right balance between fairness to defendants and justice for survivors of abuse.

As an abuse lawyer, I regularly see the challenges survivors face in seeking justice. Many live with the effects of abuse for years, or even decades, before feeling able to report what happened to them.

For survivors of childhood sexual abuse in particular, delayed disclosure is common. Yet that delay can create further difficulties where a defendant develops dementia or another condition that renders them unfit to stand trial.

Simon Byrne’s story brings those issues into sharp focus. He has waived his legal right to anonymity.

Simon’s experience of the criminal justice system

Simon Byrne is a survivor of childhood sexual abuse committed by his former boxing coach. The abuse had a profound and lasting impact on his life, affecting his mental health and personal relationships.

Like many survivors, Simon lived with the consequences of the abuse for decades before feeling able to report what had happened to the police in 2021.

By the time the case came before the court in November 2024, the defendant had developed dementia and was deemed unfit to stand trial.

As a result, the proceedings could not take place in the usual way. Instead, the court conducted a trial of the facts in May 2025. The jury concluded that the abuse had occurred, providing formal recognition of Simon’s account and experiences.

However, because the defendant was not fit to plead, he could not be convicted of the offences. The outcome was an absolute discharge, although the defendant was placed on the Sex Offenders Register.

For Simon, the result was understandably difficult. Despite a jury finding that the abuse had occurred, the absence of a criminal conviction left him feeling that justice had not been fully achieved.

A wider issue

Simon’s case is not unique.

Recent cases have highlighted similar challenges where defendants facing serious allegations have been deemed unfit to stand trial because of age-related cognitive decline or other medical conditions.

One such case involved former care home manager Malcolm Phillips, who was accused of sexually abusing vulnerable children between 1976 and 1994. Phillips, who was in his 90s, was deemed unfit to stand trial and the court therefore proceeded by way of a trial of the facts rather than a conventional criminal trial. His former assistant, Linda Brunning, was convicted of a number of offences connected to the abuse.

Cases like these demonstrate how serious allegations can be examined by the courts and findings made, but without the possibility of a criminal conviction where a defendant is unable to participate in the proceedings.

When delay affects justice

In my view, Simon’s experience exposes a significant difficulty within the current legal framework. Where a defendant becomes unfit to stand trial, particularly because of dementia, a conventional conviction may no longer be possible even where a court is satisfied that abuse occurred.

For survivors, the consequences can be profound.

Many survivors already face significant barriers to reporting abuse. Delays in disclosure are common and are often linked to the trauma caused by the abuse itself. Where the passage of time then contributes to a defendant becoming unfit to stand trial, survivors can feel that the system is unable to deliver a meaningful outcome.

The abuse itself may have occurred decades ago, but the impact can be lifelong. For some survivors, a criminal prosecution represents an opportunity not only for accountability, but also for recognition of what they experienced. When a conviction is no longer available, many are left with a sense that justice remains incomplete.

Simon’s Law

In response to his experience, Simon and his family have launched the Simon’s Law campaign, which calls for reforms to the way the criminal justice system deals with defendants who become mentally unfit before trial.

• The campaign advocates a number of potential reforms, including:
• Earlier and ongoing cognitive assessments of defendants to identify issues of capacity at an earlier stage.
• Greater clarity regarding the consequences of findings made in trials of the facts.
• Consideration of appropriate safeguarding measures where serious abuse has been established.
• Stronger recognition of victims’ voices and experiences throughout the criminal process.

Whether these proposals are ultimately adopted is a matter for policymakers and Parliament. However, the campaign has undoubtedly prompted an important discussion about how the justice system should respond when serious abuse is found to have occurred, but a criminal conviction cannot follow.

Balancing fairness and accountability

Cases involving mental incapacity are complex and require careful consideration.

Any legal framework must protect the rights of defendants who are unable to participate effectively in proceedings. Those safeguards are an essential part of a fair justice system and should not be disregarded.

At the same time, Simon’s case raises legitimate questions about whether the current system adequately recognises the interests of survivors when abuse has been established but formal criminal accountability is not possible.

The discussions prompted by Simon’s Law raise broader questions about whether the current framework achieves the right balance between protecting vulnerable defendants, maintaining public confidence in the justice system and ensuring survivors feel their experiences have been properly recognised.

Looking ahead

For many survivors, the criminal justice process is not simply about punishment. It is about acknowledgement, accountability and the reassurance that what happened to them has been formally recognised.

The law governing defendants who are unfit to stand trial serves an important purpose and safeguards fundamental principles of fairness. However, Simon’s case demonstrates that the operation of those safeguards can sometimes leave survivors feeling that justice remains incomplete.

As more historic abuse cases come before the courts, particularly those involving elderly defendants, these issues are likely to become increasingly significant. Simon and his family’s campaign has brought them into sharper focus and raises important questions about whether the current system remains fit for purpose.

Those wishing to learn more about Simon’s Law can find information through this article written by Simon for The Survivors Trust.

This blog was co-written by paralegal Astrid Parrett of Leigh Day.