R v de Grood, 2016 ABQB 294

Court of Queen ’ s Bench of Alberta Citation: R v de Grood, 2016 ABQB 294 Date: 20160525 Docket: 140419615Q1 Registry: Calgary Between: Her Majesty the Queen - and - Matthew Douglas de Grood Accused _______________________________________________________ Reasons for Judgment of the Honourable Mr. Justice Eric F. Macklin _______________________________________________________ I.

Introduction [ 1 ] Matthew de Grood is charged with five counts of first degree murder contrary to s 235(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada , RSC 1985, c C-46 in the deaths of Joshua Barclay Hunter, Kaitlan Ashley Perras, Jordan Gabriel Segura, Lawrence Martin Hong and Zackariah James Rathwell. [ 2 ] Mr. de Grood has acknowledged that he caused the deaths of the five victims. He pleads that he is not criminally responsible on the basis that he was suffering from a mental disorder at the time of the offences.

II. Background Facts [ 3 ] An Agreed Statement of Facts has been entered as an Exhibit in these proceedings. The following facts do not include all of the agreed facts, but only are those necessary to comprehend the magnitude of the events on the date in question.

Those facts which are important to this Court’s ultimate determination as to the condition of Matthew Douglas de Grood at the time will be discussed below in the context of the evidence relating to his mental condition. [ 4 ] The victims of the offences are Joshua Barclay Hunter, Kaitlan Ashley Perras, Jordan Gabriel Segura, Lawrence Martin Hong, and Zackariah James Rathwell. All of the victims were in their twenties. [ 5 ] Mr. Hunter, Ms. Perras, Mr. Segura, Mr. Hong and Mr. Rathwell were stabbed at approximately 1:15 a.m. on April 15, 2014.

They were stabbed at the residence located at 11 Butler Crescent, in the City of Calgary, in the Province of Alberta. Each of them was stabbed and killed by Matthew Douglas de Grood.

a) Matthew de Grood’s Background [ 6 ] Mr. de Grood was 22 years old on the date of the offences. He was living with his mother, Susan de Grood, his father, Douglas de Grood and his 23 year old sister in southwest Calgary. [ 7 ] In 2008, when Mr. de Grood was in Grade 11, he became involved in illicit drug use. He was using cocaine and ecstasy. Mr. de Grood’s friends became concerned and reported the drug use to his parents. Mr. de Grood attended AADAC treatment and counselling with a psychologist, Dr. David Hodgkins, for approximately one year. This seemed to resolve the drug use problem.

Mr. de Grood’s parents continued to monitor him for drug use and had access to his bank accounts. [ 8 ] In April 2013, Mr. de Grood graduated with a Bachelor of Science degree (with distinction) from the University of Calgary. His major was Psychology and his minor was Law and Society. In late 2013, he was accepted to law school at the University of Calgary and the University of Alberta. He planned to attend the University of Calgary law school in September 2014. [ 9 ] In April 2014, Mr. de Grood was employed in the produce department at the Safeway grocery store located at 99 Crowfoot Crescent NW in Calgary.

He had been working at Safeway both part-time and full-time for several years. In April 2014, he was working approximately 32 hours per week as he was not attending school. [ 10 ] Matthew de Grood had no reported history of mental illness prior to the offence date. [ 11 ] Mr. de Grood had had no involvement with the police prior to the offence date and has no criminal record.

b) The night of April 14, 2014 [ 12 ] On Monday, April 14, 2014, Matthew de Grood was scheduled to work a shift at Safeway between 2:30 p.m. and 11:00 p.m. He received a text that day from his childhood friend, Brendan McCabe, inviting him to a Bermuda Shorts Day party, an annual celebration of the last day of winter semester classes at the University of Calgary. The party was being held at 11 Butler Crescent in Calgary. Mr. McCabe lived in the house with four roommates: Sarah Kapiczowski, Teri Lewis, Michael “Joe” Regnault and Jordan Segura.

The five roommates were all in their 20s and were either U of C students or starting their careers. [ 13 ] Mr. de Grood took the C-Train from Crowfoot station to Brentwood station. At 9 p.m., Mr. McCabe met Mr. de Grood at a Co-op gas station near Brentwood station as Mr. de Grood said he could not remember how to get to the house. He was still wearing his work uniform. [ 14 ] Approximately 25 to 35 people attended the party over the course of the night. Mr. de Grood was not observed to consume any alcohol or drugs over the course of the night.

There were no confrontations between anyone at the party and Mr. de Grood, and he had no enemies at the party. The atmosphere of the party has been described as “laid back and relaxed” and everyone was in a good mood.

c) The Stabbings [ 15 ] Just before 1:00 a.m. on April 15, 2014, Mr. McCabe, Mr. Regnault, Ms. Kapiczowski and Jayda Shreenan went to a nearby McDonald’s restaurant to pick up food. Ms. Kapiczowski drove them in her car. At the time, Ryle Lindenaar and Elizabeth Stockmal were sitting in Mr. Lindanaar’s car parked across the street from the house and Laura York went out to the car to join them. [ 16 ] Lawrence Hong, Joshua Hunter, Kaitlan Perras, Zackariah Rathwell, Jordan Segura, Teri Lewis and Matthew de Grood all remained in the house. [ 17 ] Mr. Hong was lying down and sleeping on a couch in the living room.

Mr. Hunter, Ms. Perras and Mr. Segura were seated on a second couch facing the other. Mr. Rathwell and Mr. de Grood were in the kitchen. Ms. Lewis was lying in her bed in her upstairs bedroom, trying to fall asleep. There was no one else in the house. [ 18 ] Mr. de Grood picked up a chef’s knife from a knife block on an open shelf in the kitchen. The knife had a black handle with a single cutting edged, non-serrated blade that tapers into a sharp tip. The blade measured 21 centimeters in length by 4.6 centimeters in width at the widest point and had a thickness of 3 millimeters.

[ 19 ] Using the knife, Mr. de Grood stabbed Mr. Rathwell seven times, Mr. Hunter six times, Mr. Segura once, Ms. Perras four times and Mr. Hong four times. [ 20 ] The stabbings occurred quickly and unexpectedly. The five victims had little, if any, opportunity to react. Mr. Rathwell was stabbed in the kitchen. Mr. Hunter and Mr. Segura were stabbed on or near the couch on which they were sitting and Ms. Perras was stabbed in the dining room as she tried to escape. Mr. Hong was asleep on the couch when he was stabbed. [ 21 ] After being stabbed, Mr.

Hunter ran out the front door of the house just as the four individuals were returning from the McDonald’ restaurant. As they walked from the driveway towards the house, they heard Ms. Perras screaming inside the house and saw Mr. Hunter running out the door and across the front lawn. Mr. de Grood was chasing Mr. Hunter and held the knife in his hand. [ 22 ] Mr. de Grood chased Mr. Hunter southbound down Butler Crescent. Mr. McCabe ran after Mr. de Grood and caught up to him about 150 meters from the house. Mr. de Grood was holding the knife above his head with the blade pointed downward. [ 23 ] Mr.

McCabe grabbed Mr. de Grood’s hand that was holding the knife and told him to give him the knife and to calm down. Mr. de Grood lowered his hand and released the knife to Mr. McCabe, which Mr. McCabe grabbed. The knife and Mr. de Grood’s gloved hands had blood on them. [ 24 ] Mr. Hunter returned to the house and collapsed on the front lawn. [ 25 ] Mr. de Grood told Mr. McCabe that it was “the night of the long knives” and took off running southbound towards Brentwood Boulevard. Mr. McCabe threw the knife onto the roadway and chased after Mr. de Grood, catching up to him after about 200 meters. Mr.

McCabe grabbed Mr. de Grood and told him to calm down and come back to the house. Mr. de Grood pulled away and Mr. McCabe pushed Mr. de Grood up against a parked vehicle. [ 26 ] Mr. de Grood wiped his bloody hands on Mr. McCabe’s hands. He said that they were “blood brothers” and wanted Mr. McCabe to come with him. He then told Mr. McCabe not to get in his way, or he would be next. Mr. McCabe noticed that Mr. de Grood had his hand in his pocket, and he was worried that Mr. de Grood might still have a box-cutter with him, which had been noticed earlier in Mr. de Grood’s work uniform. [ 27 ] Mr.

McCabe let Mr. de Grood go, and Mr. de Grood ran eastbound on Brentwood Boulevard. Mr. McCabe ran back to the house. [ 28 ] Ms. Lewis, who had been in her upstairs bedroom at the time of the stabbings, had heard a male voice yelling words to the effect of “it’s okay, it’s cool -- dude, calm down” and phoned 911. Ms. Lewis went downstairs to find Mr. Rathwell, Mr. Segura, Ms. Perras and Mr. Hong injured. Mr. McCabe, who had already chased Mr. de Grood down the street, told Ms. Lewis that the perpetrator was Mr. de Grood. Ms. Lewis provided Mr. de Grood’s name to the 911 operator. [ 29 ] Ms. Lewis, Ms.

Shreenan, Ms. Kapiczowski and Mr. McCabe provided first aid to the victims inside the house. Mr. Regnault provided first aid to Mr. Hunter on the front lawn. Ms. Shreenan and Mr. Regnault also phoned 911. Mr. Regnault provided a description of Mr. de Grood to the 911 operator. [ 30 ] Between 1:21 a.m. and 1:23 a.m. on April 15, 2014, police received three separate 911 calls about a stabbing incident at the house and at 1:26 a.m., the first members of Calgary Police Service arrived on scene. [ 31 ] At 1:34 a.m., Emergency Medical Services confirmed that Mr. Rathwell, Mr. Segura and Mr.

Hong were deceased. [ 32 ] At 1:39 a.m., Ms. Perras was transported from the scene to the Foothills Hospital where she was pronounced deceased at 3:00 a.m. [ 33 ] At 1:44 a.m., Mr. Hunter was transported from the scene to the Foothills Hospital where he was pronounced deceased at 2:17 a.m.

d) The Arrest [ 34 ] Mr. de Grood’s description was dispatched to CPS members in the area. At approximately 1:30 a.m., he was seen running southeast bound on Brentwood Boulevard, approximately 500 meters from 11 Butler Crescent. He was running frantically and appeared to be trying to get away from something. [ 35 ] A police service dog from the K9 unit was deployed. After a confrontation with the police and the service dog, during which force was used by the Officers and the service dog, Mr. de Grood was apprehended. [ 36 ] At 2:15 a.m., Mr. de Grood was formally arrested for murder and attempted murder. III.

The Law [ 37 ] The Crown has an onus to establish two things beyond a reasonable doubt in most criminal prosecutions. First, the Crown must prove the actus reus , that is, the wrongful act of the accused which comprises the physical component of the offence.

Secondly, the Crown must prove the mens rea , that is, the mental element or intent required for the commission of the criminal act. [ 38 ] In R v McClenaghan , 2008 ABCA 7 , 437 AR 247, leave denied [2008] SCCA No 226, Watson JA (concurring in the result) addressed the order of the steps to be followed by the Court in cases where mental disorder is raised as a defence. He cited R v Chaulk ,

(SCC), [1990] 3 SCR 1303, [1990] SCJ No 139 in which Lamer CJ noted that a defence of mental disorder can be raisedin a number of different ways, depending on the mental condition of the accused. It could give rise to a denial of the actus reus or themens rea, or it could be in the nature of an excuse or justification based on the fact that the accused’s mental condition rendered himincapable of knowing that the act was wrong.

Lamer CJ rejected the argument that the issue of mental disorder arises only after both theactus reus and mens rea have been proved by the Crown. [39] Watson JA also cited R v David, (2002), (ON CA), 169 CCC (3d) 165, [2002] OJ No 3455 (CA) in whichthe Ontario Court of Appeal held that it is preferable and more logical to deal with the issue of capacity before considering whether anaccused formed the requisite intent. [40] Relying on these authorities, Watson JA stated that the first logical step is to determine whether the actus reus has beenproven by the Crown beyond a reasonable doubt.

The second stage is to consider if mental disorder has been proven. If that defence fails,the Court must then consider whether the Crown has established the mens rea on the offence charged. [41] I find that this is the logical approach to take in this case. [42] As stated, Mr. de Grood has acknowledged that he caused the deaths of the five victims. Therefore, the actus reus of theoffences has been established beyond a reasonable doubt. [43] Mr. de Grood pleads that he is not criminally responsible for the deaths under s 16 of the Criminal Code as he was sufferingfrom a mental disorder at the time of the offences.

The onus is on Mr. de Grood to establish this on a balance of probabilities. Therefore,the next step for the Court is to consider Mr. de Grood’s defence of mental disorder.

a) Criminal Responsibility [44] The traditional fundamental principle of the common law is that an individual’s responsibility for criminal behaviour resultsonly from voluntary actions. This important principle is based on a recognition that it would be unfair in a democratic society to imposethe consequences and stigma of criminal responsibility on an accused who did not voluntarily commit

an act that constitutes a criminaloffence: R v Bouchard-Lebrun, 2011 SCC 58 at para 45, [2011] 3 SCR 575. [45] A voluntary act must be the product of a person’s free will. Accordingly, one cannot be found criminally responsible for aninvoluntary act.

From a moral perspective, criminal responsibility is attributed where the individual has exercised a “true choice”, or hasacted with “free will”. [46] In R v Ruzic, 2001 SCC 24 at para 45, [2001] 1 SCR 687, the Supreme Court of Canada emphasised that: ...Like voluntariness, the requirement of a guilty mind is rooted in respect for individual autonomy and free will and acknowledges theimportance of those values to a free and democratic society . . .

Criminal liability also depends on the capacity to choose - the ability toreason right from wrong. [47] The presumption that arises from this basis for attributing criminal responsibility is that each individual can ordinarilydistinguish right from wrong. [48]

Section 16 of the Criminal Code is a recognition that there may be exceptional circumstances which justify departing fromthe general principle that an accused is deemed to be autonomous and rational. It provides: 16

(1) No person is criminally responsible for

an act committed or an omission made while suffering from a mental disorder thatrendered the person incapable of appreciating the nature and quality of the act or omission or of knowing that it was wrong.

(2) Every person is presumed not to suffer from a mental disorder so as to be exempt from criminal responsibility by virtue of subsection(1), until the contrary is proved on the balance of probabilities.

(3) The burden of proof that an accused was suffering from a mental disorder so as to be exempt from criminal responsibility is on theparty that raises the issue. [49]

Section 16 addresses the situation where a person suffering from a mental disorder renders that person incapable ofappreciating the nature and quality of the act or of knowing that it was wrong. That is, it applies to a person who is not capable ofmorally voluntary conduct as his or her actions are not the product of free will.

In such cases, s 16 exempts the accused from criminalliability. [50] A finding of a mental disorder leading to a verdict of not criminally responsible does not result in an acquittal of the accused.Rather, it triggers an administrative process to determine whether the accused poses a significant threat to the safety of the public. If so,necessary actions are taken to control that threat and to provide the accused with appropriate care.

A verdict of not criminally responsibleon account of mental disorder gives effect to society’s interest in ensuring that morally innocent offenders are treated rather thanpunished, while protecting the public as fully as possible: Bouchard-Lebrun at paras 46 to 52.

b) Section 16 Requirements [51] To successfully establish a defence of mental disorder, the accused must establish on a balance of probabilities that: 1. he was suffering from a mental disorder in the legal sense at the time of the alleged events; and 2. due to his mental condition, he was either incapable of appreciating the nature and quality of the act or of knowing that the act was

wrong. IV. Evidence

a) Matthew de Grood’s Behaviour [ 52 ] The Agreed Statement of Facts outlines Mr. de Grood’s behaviour from the perspective of a number of people during the last few months leading up to the time of the stabbings and then immediately following the stabbings. The actions and behaviours described have been considered by the medical experts in determining whether, in their respective opinions, Mr. de Grood was suffering from a mental disorder at the time of the stabbings and whether he was incapable of appreciating the nature and quality of his actions or of knowing that they were wrong.

The following are only examples taken from all of the described behaviours and actions leading up to, and immediately following, the stabbings and serve to illustrate the types of information and evidence considered and relied upon by the experts in forming their respective opinions.

b) Matthew de Grood’s Behaviour at Home [ 53 ] Mr. de Grood’s parents and sister noticed a significant personality change in Mr. de Grood in the few weeks prior to the offence date. [ 54 ] Around the beginning of April 2014, he began posting things on the social media site Facebook which were concerning to his parents and sister. They included heavy metal song lyrics, quotes from the Bible, conspiracy theories, and erratic, scattered thoughts.

He was posting up to 20 status updates a day which they had never seen before. [ 55 ] Mr. de Grood’s parents and sister also noticed that he had become disengaged from the family in the few days before the offence date and spent a great deal of time alone in his bedroom. [ 56 ] Mr. de Grood’s change in behaviour caused his parents to wonder if he was using drugs again. They asked him if he wished to again speak with Dr. Hodgkins, but he declined.

His father considered swearing a mental health warrant and having Mr. de Grood seen by a psychiatrist, but he did not think that a psychiatrist would hold Mr. de Grood for any period of time as he appeared to be lucid.

c) Matthew de Grood’s Behaviour at Work [ 57 ] Mr. de Grood worked part-time as a produce clerk at the Crowfoot Safeway. His supervisor for the last year was Andrea Laderoute, the assistant manager, who had also worked with Mr. de Grood in the produce area for about two years. She said that he was a great employee who did everything asked of him and further described him as a really nice guy, caring and an all-around good person. In the one or two months prior to the night of April 14, 2014, she noticed that there was a marked change in behaviour and he began acting paranoid.

His Facebook posts became rants and referred to, among other things, different conspiracy theories. However, there were no threats of harm and nothing to suggest that he would become violent. [ 58 ] Some of Mr. de Grood’s co-workers at Safeway also noticed a change in his behaviour in the weeks prior to the offence date as he had begun acting strangely. For example, two of his co-employees received a number of text messages from him which they found to be unusual in that they were long and rambling, which was out of character for him.

The employees believed that Mr. de Grood was inventing false scenarios in his mind and was paranoid. [ 59 ] Mr. de Grood also believed his co-workers were gossiping about him and saying negative things about him behind his back, none of which was true. In text messages on March 25, 2014, Mr. de Grood expressed paranoia about people saying that he was a drug user and alcoholic, that he abused women, that he had cheated on women, that he was mentally ill, that he was racist, and that he was being beaten or berated at home.

He believed that his co-workers were conspiring against him and excluding him from activities. [ 60 ] Mr. de Grood sent text messages denying the allegations he believed people were making about him to co-workers who had never made any such allegations against him and were confused by his messages.

d) Matthew de Grood’s Facebook Page [ 61 ] On April 14, 2014, Mr. de Grood posted a status update that read: “Dread and the fugitive mind - the world needs a hero”. “Dread and the Fugitive Mind” is a song by the heavy metal band Megadeth as is the song “The World Needs a Hero”. [ 62 ] Friends who had viewed Mr. de Grood’s Facebook in the weeks prior to the offence date have said they saw nonsensical posts by Mr. de Grood, often philosophical with rhetorical questions about strange topics. They included comments on things like conspiracy theories, religion, death metal album covers, reincarnation, and a photo of Darth Vader dressed as a priest.

e) Matthew de Grood’s Electronic Devices [ 63 ] Mr. de Grood’s internet search queries on websites such as Google and YouTube between January 1, 2013 and the offence date included searches related to health, music, online dating, psychology, history and other interests. There were several searches relating to psychological theories, mental disorders and serial killers. These types of searches began while Mr. de Grood was studying Psychology and continued after he graduated from the U of C in April 2013.

[ 64 ] In the two weeks leading up to the offence date, Mr. de Grood searched for and visited many websites relating to social and political philosophies, heavy metal music, the world wars, Hitler and Nazism, religion and the Bible, Barack Obama being the antichrist, reincarnation, and the Babylonian god Marduk.

f) Matthew de Grood’s behaviour during the evening of April 14, 2014 [ 65 ] The assistant manager at Safeway, Ms. Laderoute, saw Mr. de Grood about four times in the store prior to 8:30 p.m. on April 14, 2014.

His behaviour was somewhat unusual and she noted that Mr. de Grood was posting “weird stuff” on Facebook while he was at work that day. [ 66 ] Between 5:51 p.m. and 6:38 p.m., Mr. de Grood sent a number of text messages to his Mother, including the following: • In Frankenstein victor Frakenstein never kills anyone so he has nothing to fear • And he doesn’t care about $ • Look up my chinese astrology • Book of revelations • I am descended from pontious pilate and hitler? • One in the same • Hot fuzz the movie is the real story. [ 67 ] Between 6:28 p.m. and 6:36 p.m., Mr. de Grood sent a number of text messages to his Father.

The text messages include the following: • I am definitely your son • Uranus and Leo and metal goat • It’s all there • All literature tells the same story look up the Rothschilds • Illuminati • Tupac reincarnation 7 day theory • Mary doesn’t have to die this time operation mindcrime to american soldier • Just read it. [ 68 ] When Mr. de Grood’s parents expressed concern about his mental well-being, he texted both of them to “call John Ellard or Kibeom Lee”, who were professors in the Department of Psychology at the University of Calgary. [ 69 ] At 7:51 p.m., Mr. de Grood purchased a three bulb pack of garlic at Safeway. [ 70 ] At 8:29 p.m., Mr. de Grood purchased a bottle of garlic vitamins at Safeway.

He also withdrew $500 cash from an automated teller machine at Safeway. [ 71 ] Matthew de Grood left the Safeway store at 8:31 p.m. wearing his work uniform. He left his vehicle at Safeway.

g) The night of April 14 and early morning of April 15, 2014 [ 72 ] At 9:00 p.m., Mr. McCabe met Mr. de Grood at a Co-op gas station near the Brentwood C-train station because Mr. de Grood said he could not remember how to get to the House. He was still wearing his work uniform. [ 73 ] At the Co-op station, Mr. de Grood handed Mr. McCabe a clove of garlic and told Mr. McCabe that he was going to need it for later. Mr. McCabe asked Mr. de Grood if he was worried about vampires and Mr. de Grood responded that he was, because they are real. Mr. de Grood also gave Mr.

McCabe a long knife with a white handle in a brown leather sheath, which Mr. McCabe assumed Mr. de Grood had been using in his job at Safeway. [ 74 ] During the six minute walk to the house, Mr. de Grood began discussing conspiracy theories about things that were nonsensical to Mr. McCabe, such as patterns in the movie The Matrix that exist in real life, Barack Obama being the anti-Christ, and hidden meanings in song lyrics. Mr. McCabe observed that Mr. de Grood appeared agitated and was acting “weird”. [ 75 ] After they arrived at the house, Mr. de Grood continued to talk to Mr.

McCabe about strange things like numbers, patterns and books. [ 76 ] At 10:00 p.m., Ms. Laderoute noticed that Mr. de Grood was no longer in the store. She checked his time card and discovered that he had signed out at approximately 8:30 p.m. without notifying anyone. He had never before left a shift early.

[ 77 ] At 10:12 p.m., Ms. Laderoute texted Mr. de Grood and asked if he was still at Safeway. He texted back: • Trust that I never hurt anyone • All will be known • 5 [ 78 ] At approximately 10:15 p.m., Daniel Sieben, another long-time friend of Mr. de Grood, greeted him while he was sitting on a couch by himself. After a couple of minutes, Mr. de Grood began talking quickly about a number of strange topics including disconnected pop culture references. For example, he said that Obama was the bad Darth Vader and he was a good Darth Vader. He made references to theories he had about musicians and album covers.

He made several comments about vampires. He said that at midnight, it would be “the end of days” because of the blood moon, or the lunar eclipse. [ 79 ] Mr. Sieben then took Mr. de Grood for a walk around the neighbourhood. During their 30 to 45 minute walk, Mr. de Grood continued to talk quickly about several “crazy theories”. Mr. de Grood ate a clove of garlic and offered garlic to Mr. Sieben, saying it was to keep vampires away and keep Mr. Sieben protected at the end of the world. Mr. de Grood’s dominating thought was that the world was ending at midnight. Mr.

Sieben noted that Mr. de Grood had a box-cutter in his work uniform. [ 80 ] After they returned to the house, Mr. de Grood put on a pair of blue medical latex gloves on his hands. He said they were to hide his fingerprints in case he had to kill somebody at the end of the world. Mr. Sieben pointed out that if it is the end of the world, there is no need to hide fingerprints. Mr. de Grood said that it made him more comfortable to leave them on and if people asked questions about the gloves, he would just put his hands in his pockets, which he did.

He was later seen washing his hands while still wearing the gloves. [ 81 ] Neither Mr. Sieben nor Mr. McCabe had ever seen Mr. de Grood acting in this manner. [ 82 ] Prior to midnight, Mr. de Grood, Mr. McCabe and others climbed onto the roof of the garage to talk. Mr. de Grood told Mr. McCabe that it was going to be the end of the world at midnight. The moon was going to turn red and purification would occur. Mr. de Grood was not normally a religious person but he began talking about purification and Jihad. [ 83 ] Mr. Sieben had told Mr. McCabe that Mr. de Grood was carrying the box cutter and when Mr.

McCabe asked him for it so that he could put it in his bedroom, Mr. de Grood responded “No, it’s for my protection”. Mr. de Grood also told Mr. McCabe that his parents thought he was going insane and wanted him to seek help and get medication. [ 84 ] Around 12:30 a.m., Mr. de Grood joined a group of people gathered around a fire pit in the backyard. He placed his cell phone on an axe blade and dropped it in the fire. Mr. Lindenaar pulled the phone out of the fire. Mr. de Grood then grabbed it, smashed it with an axe and threw it at the fence. [ 85 ] Mr. Regnault had known Mr. de Grood since elementary school.

He offered Mr. de Grood some tea which Mr. de Grood declined, saying that he did not want to get “water intoxicated”. He said that he had drank a lot of water at work as he had been getting ready for the big apocalypse but the moon had not turned red at midnight so it was okay. He was also observed to print his name on a pop can. Mr. de Grood told Mr. Regnault that he was embarrassed about getting ready for the apocalypse. He also told Mr.

Regnault that he would not be going to work the following day as he did not get along with his boss. [ 86 ] As stated earlier, Mr. de Grood was not observed to consume any alcohol or drugs over the course of the night. There were no confrontations between anyone at the party and Mr. de Grood, and he had no enemies at the party. [ 87 ] Between 12:32 a.m. and 12:43 a.m., Mr. de Grood and his Mother exchanged text messages.

His messages included the following: • Read cirque du freak I’m not paranoid • Just read it and read about the moons google it trust me • I love you • Trust me it’s reincarnation this time I do the right thing for once instead of thinking only of myself • tonight was alan wake and sermon on the mount • Alan wake is distorted through illuminati • It’s okay mom i promise • I will never die and no one will die • You can’t come here you will die • Just read the book summaries • Trust me! • You are possessed by the moon I will come to you okay

[ 88 ] Mr. de Grood’s parents found his text messages to be rambling and incoherent. They suspected that he was suicidal.

h) Mr. de Grood’s arrest and post-arrest behaviour [ 89 ] When Matthew de Grood was apprehended, he was noted to have a blank stare on his face and appeared to have no fear of the Police service dog which Constable Rob Tippett, the dog’s handler, found to be very unusual. At one point, Mr. de Grood ran towards one of the arresting officers and attempted to punch him.

When the police used force to apprehend Mr. de Grood, which included the police service dog forcefully biting his right arm and Constable Shawn MacGillivary administering several powerful knee strikes to his leg, Mr. de Grood showed no pain compliance. He continually screamed “I don’t know what’s happening”. His skin was very pale. [ 90 ] The police officers attempted to force Mr. de Grood to lie on the ground.

The officers each testified to the apparent superhuman strength shown by Mr. de Grood, who weighed around 140 pounds at the time, in resisting the weight of three police officers and a 90 pound police dog all attempting to force him down. Eventually, it took the actions of Constable Blaine Kirby in pulling the legs out from under Mr. de Grood that caused him to go down flat on the ground. [ 91 ] A latex glove was found in Mr. de Grood’s right pocket and a mesh bag with a clove of garlic was found in his sock.

When asked, he advised that the garlic was to keep the vampires away. [ 92 ] After Emergency Medical Services attended and before being placed in the ambulance, Mr. de Grood said “I was just trying to kill them before they killed me”. [ 93 ] At 2:15 a.m., while in the ambulance, Mr. de Grood was arrested for murder and attempted murder. He was read his Charter rights and caution and he indicated that he wanted to call a lawyer.

In response to the caution that he was not obliged to say anything, Mr. de Grood responded, “I’m the Son of God”. [ 94 ] During the ambulance ride to Rockyview Hospital, Mr. de Grood made a number of statements including the following: • I don’t want to say I did it, if you know what I mean.

It was the son, the illuminate, and the church was raping and killing children. • I’m waging war on a spiritual plane, it’s between the sun and the moon, Anubis if you know. • Hitler was Pontius Pilate reincarnated. • I believe killing people in self-defence is just and fair. • Obama is a false prophet and I am the son. • I was born in an incubator and I’m an alien. • I felt like I was going to be poisoned by… • I don’t believe Hitler killed anyone and was framed. • I want to thank everyone for being nice to me and not shooting me when you could have and I wanted to die. • The dog bit me and it was fair and just and I deserve to lose a limb. • I tried to commit suicide in the dumpster I was in.

I cut my wrists. • I believe I am Jesus reincarnated. • I’m not paranoid, schizo or crazy.

I believe we live in the new age. • I thought I could predict the future by looking to the past. • The system has failed. • Treat my wrists so I don’t die please. • I tried to cut my ankle, Achilles tendon. • What I did was justified. • I saw nooses around Butler mansion so I thought that meant I was supposed to kill myself. • I believe Satan is the true god. • My dad is a great guy. • My mom is a great mom. • I want to thank everyone being nice to me. • What I did may seem atrocious but I was killing medusas and werewolves.

• I thought I was allergic to latex but I was wearing latex gloves so I guess not. • It’s a lunar eclipse. It was supposed to be the night of the long knives, a prophecy from the Book of Revelations. [ 95 ] After his arrival at Rockyview Hospital, Mr. de Grood was heard to make the following statements: • I’m sorry for framing Charles Manson. • I’m sorry for being a terrible person. • I’ve been sober for six years. • I’m sorry if Adolf Hitler killed his own family. • I didn’t enjoy killing at all.

I said sorry, but the son of God was controlling me. • I’m related to all the serial killers in history. • The taller guy who looked like a werewolf was going to kill. A knife block was there and I thought he was going to kill me first so I did what I had to do. • I don’t feel bad for doing what I had to do because it’s justice and I was being controlled. • Can I get painkillers? This hurts. I guess I deserve it.

Well, not really because I was doing the work of… • I took garlic to protect me from the vampires. • I left work early because I thought I was going to die. • I tried to punch a cop in the face so he would shoot me. • I stabbed people in the house. • I created a flask symbol to wage war on Anubis. • I wanted to be sober tonight so it wasn’t a Ted Bundy thing blaming it on alcohol. • Dog bit me hard.

I knew it was going to happen but I deserved it. • I punched the dog in the face and I’m sorry I did that. • This guy at my work stole a bunch of knives and may be traveling around the world killing children. • I cut my wrists with a box cutter. It was stigmata. • I foresaw a long time ago that I was going to be bitten by a dog. • I don’t do much consciously, I do most things intuitively. [ 96 ] At one point, Mr. de Grood stated: “I had the latex gloves in my pockets. I equated myself to Darth Vader. Knives were going missing at work, but it wasn’t me.

A guy there talks anti-Semitic, so it just made me suspicious. I don’t want you guys to do a real investigation on that, just maybe search his house. My dad sits at home. He’s a great guy and everyone disrespects the police and that’s garbage.” At a later point he stated, “I thought war was going to wage and I had the knife because I thought I was going to have to cut up the bodies.” [ 97 ] Later, Mr. de Grood acknowledged stabbing the victims but stated that he “tried to do it mercifully”. He then said the following: So, as far as I know, what happened was -- will it still be a murder if I was defending myself?

Because he was really bothering me. So what happened was, the big tall guy, we were talking about Buddhist philosophies, that we’re all going to die, so just have fun, have sex, et cetera. He obviously disagreed with me and was towering over me, so I asked him to give me my space. We were walking towards the knife block, so I decided to shoot first because I didn’t know what he was going to do, so I stabbed him. Then the people on the couch saw and they obviously started freaking out, so I killed them from left to right as quickly as I could. The girl ran into the corner, so I went and stabbed her.

I said, I am sorry, I have to do this. Then the guy from the kitchen wasn’t dead, so I had to hunt him down, but then I just left.

i) Psychiatric Examination of Mr. de Grood on April 15, 2014 [ 98 ] Emergency room doctors certified Mr. de Grood under the Mental Health Act , SA 2010, c A-19.5 at 10:00 a.m. on April 15, 2014. It was noted in the admission certificate that he was “psychotic” and had “no insight into illness”. He was referred to the Psychiatry Unit. [ 99 ] Mr. de Grood was briefly assessed by psychiatrist Dr. Raymond Tang-Wai at 10:30 a.m. Dr. Tang-Wai also certified Mr. de Grood under the Mental Health Act .

He observed Mr. de Grood to be calm and cooperative without psychomotor agitation and displaying a euthymic affect and normal speech. Some thought disorder was noted, Mr. de Grood did not appear to have insight, and his

judgment was thought to be impaired. [100] Mr. de Grood was seen again by Dr. Tang-Wai at 3:45 p.m., and he stated he would not talk without his lawyer present. He wasobserved to become tearful, though he would not explain this. He did not appear to be responding to any internal stimuli. [101] Mr. de Grood was transferred to the Southern Alberta Forensic Psychiatry Centre on the evening of April 15, 2014, andadmitted to the care of Dr. Reilly Smith. Over the next few hours, Mr. de Grood was observed to engage in disorganized behaviour suchas walking around naked while making references to Adam and Eve.

He made comments about the Egyptian Sun God, pentagrams, theend of the world, and a war. He made threats that he would harm or kill others who entered his room, because it was a war and he neededto protect himself. He was observed to be having a conversation with himself and making odd hand gestures that he explained were tokeep him safe. [102] Mr. de Grood has remained in custody either at SAFPC or at the Calgary Remand Centre since the Offence Date. V.

Analysis [103] The court must now determine whether Matthew de Grood is not criminally responsible for the deaths of the five victims on thebasis that he was suffering from a mental disorder that rendered him incapable of appreciating or knowing that his actions were wrong. [104] The Court heard from three expert medical witnesses: Dr. Alberto Choy, a Forensic Psychiatrist at Alberta Hospital Edmonton;Dr. Lenka Zedkova, a Forensic Psychiatrist at Alberta Hospital Edmonton; and Dr. Andrew Haag, a Forensic Psychologist at AlbertaHospital Edmonton.

In reaching their respective opinions, each relied extensively on the information and evidence received from manysources, including those referred to earlier, together with intensive clinical psychiatric and psychosocial assessments. As well, Mr. deGrood was interviewed on a number of occasions. I will not review their evidence in detail as each has provided a report and the reportshave been entered as exhibits in this trial. I will, however, highlight portions of the evidence given by each.

a) The Mental State of Matthew de Grood [105]

Section 2 of the Criminal Code defines a mental disorder as “a disease of the mind”. The concept of a “disease of the mind”includes “any illness, disorder or abnormal condition which impairs the human mind and its functioning”: Cooper v The Queen, (SCC), [1980] 1 SCR 1149 at 1159, [1979] SCJ No 139. [106] The concept of a disease of the mind is a legal concept with a medical dimension.

The respective roles of the expert, the judgeand the jury are summarized in R v Stone, (SCC), [1999] 2 SCR 290, [1999] SCJ No 27 at para 197, cited inBouchard-Lebrun at para 63, as follows: Taken alone, the question of what mental conditions are included in the term "disease of the mind" is a question of law. However, thetrial judge must also determine whether the condition the accused claims to have suffered from satisfies the legal test for disease of themind.

This involves an assessment of the particular evidence in the case rather than a general principle of law and is thus a question ofmixed law and fact. . . .The question of whether the accused actually suffered from a disease of the mind is a question of fact to bedetermined by the trier of fact. [107] In considering the mental state of Mr. de Grood and whether he suffered from a disease of the mind at the time of the indexoffences, each of the three experts performed their analysis and reached their conclusions independently of the findings and opinions ofthe others.

Their opinions on this issue are as follows: Dr. Alberto Choy [108] Dr. Choy opined that Mr. de Grood suffered from a psychotic episode on and around the Offence Date. He states that thedisorganization and delusions identified at the time of the offences, and Mr. de Grood’s response to treatment, were not atypical of asevere psychotic disorder. It is not clear to Dr.

Choy, however, whether the underlying illness resulting in the psychotic disorder isschizophrenia, bipolar disorder or schizoaffective disorder. [109] In specifically addressing the question of whether Mr. de Grood was suffering from a mental disorder, Dr. Choy indicates thatthere is ample evidence to suggest that Mr. De Grood was suffering from a mental disorder in the week prior to the index offences andduring the commission of the offences. By referring to Mr. de Grood’s own report and considering the multiple collateral sources, itappears to Dr.

Choy that Mr. de Grood experienced persecutory delusions before, during and after the index offences. The treatment Mr.de Grood received with medication showed a typical response in the improvement of symptoms and his presentation of a flattened affectand some degree of perplexity also supported the presence of a psychotic illness. [110] Dr. Choy further stated that Mr. de Grood’s multiple delusions were consistent both prior to and after the offences and they hadbeen expressed in various settings including his home, his work and online.

The seeming randomness of his delusional beliefs supportedthe notion that he was genuinely psychotic because of the disorganization that can occur in this state. Finally, Dr. Choy states that theredid not appear to be any other clear motive for the offences. [111] Dr. Choy thereby concludes that at the time of the index offences, Mr. de Grood was suffering from a mental disorder as that term is considered in s 16 of the Criminal Code and defined by s 2. Dr. Lenka Zedkova

[ 112 ] In her analysis, Dr. Zedkova states that “it appears that for a period of at least several weeks prior to the index offences, Mr. de Grood was losing touch with reality”. She refers to his having experienced persecutory delusions (the Illuminati conspiring to kill him), grandiose delusions (being the Son of God, the second coming of Jesus), religious delusions (speaking of the Sun God and the Moon God and the war between them) and delusions of reference (receiving messages from songs). He was experiencing auditory hallucinations and responding to them. [ 113 ] Dr.

Zedkova concludes that at the time of the index offences, Mr. de Grood appeared to be in a psychotic state, likely in the context of schizophrenia or schizo-affective disorder. She does state that, in her opinion, the diagnosis of schizophrenia appears to be the preferential diagnosis. Regardless of the specific diagnosis, however, Dr. Zedkova concludes that at the time of the index offences, Mr. de Grood was suffering from a mental disorder as that term is contemplated by s 16 of the Criminal Code . Dr. Andrew Haag [ 114 ] Dr.

Haag expressed the view that Mr. de Grood likely had psychotic experiences of multiple varieties. His shift to psychotic behaviour and perceptions appeared to be relatively rapid and from multiple sources, he was noted to have been preoccupied with conspiracies. His thoughts were noted to be scattered and disorganized. Dr. Haag also refers to Mr. de Grood having experienced delusions of reference (such as numbers having specific meanings and heavy metal songs communicating specific messages) and other delusions (relating to the Illuminati, an impending apocalypse, vampires, reincarnation and others).

His delusional thoughts were noted in multiple contexts including work, home and socially. Mr. de Grood’s actions on the night of April 14, including the purchase of garlic, consuming garlic to ward off vampires, providing garlic and a knife to Mr. McCabe and wearing gloves, are all consistent with him experiencing psychotic symptoms. [ 115 ] After his review and assessment, Dr. Haag opined that “Mr. DeGrood has a disorder that is primarily of a psychotic nature; given the presence of auditory hallucinations, it is most likely that Mr. DeGrood has Schizophrenia”. From the information he obtained and reviewed, Dr.

Haag provided the opinion that “Mr. DeGrood, proximal to the alleged index offences, experienced his first episode of psychosis.” Dr. Haag believes that Mr. DeGrood was in the midst of a psychotic episode at the time of the offences and believes on a balance of probabilities that Mr. de Grood was suffering from a disease of the mind at the time. That is, he was suffering from a mental disorder as contemplated by s 16 of the Criminal Code .

Conclusion on the Mental State of Matthew de Grood [ 116 ] While the three experts are not unanimous in the specific diagnosis of the underlying condition affecting Mr. de Grood and causing his psychosis at the time of the offences, they are unanimous in concluding that he was suffering from a mental disorder at the time. Each considered whether substance abuse, past or present, could have been a cause or contributing cause to his disorder, and is satisfied that it could not. Mr. de Grood suffered from a psychotic episode which Dr. Zedkova and Dr. Haag attributed to a likely diagnosis of schizophrenia, while Dr.

Choy was unsure as to whether it was caused by schizophrenia, bipolar disorder or schizoaffective disorder. [ 117 ] Nonetheless, as stated, each is satisfied that at the time of the offences in question, Mr. de Grood was suffering from a severe or acute psychotic episode. That is, he had lost touch with reality. They each consider his psychosis as a “disease of the mind”, or a “mental disorder” as defined in the Criminal Code .

Having reviewed all of the evidence, I accept the opinions of the experts and find on a balance of probabilities that at the time of the index offences, Mr. de Grood was suffering from a mental disorder within the meaning of s 16 of the Criminal Code .

b) The Effects of Matthew de Grood’s Mental Disorder [ 118 ] The three experts provided the following opinions on the effect of Mr. de Grood’s mental disorder: Dr. Alberto Choy [ 119 ] Mr. De Grood advised that he retrieved the knife in order to assault the first victim and he intended also to assault the other four victims. In the opinion of Dr. Choy, it is more likely than not that Mr. De Grood appreciated the nature and quality of his acts in stabbing his victims. [ 120 ] Mr. de Grood, however, believed that the first victim, Mr. Rathwell, was a werewolf as they discussed the end of the world. He told Dr.

Choy that he felt immediately threatened as Mr. Rathwell said to him “maybe you’ll die before me”. At this point, Mr. de Grood said that he grabbed the knife to arm himself before Mr. Rathwell could attack him and then aimed the knife at his heart as he believed that this was the only way to kill a werewolf. Mr. de Grood then indicated to Dr. Choy that the other four victims had earlier snubbed him causing him to believe that they were members of “the other side” or the conspiracy, requiring him to then kill them before they killed him. [ 121 ] It is the opinion of Dr.

Choy that, more likely than not, Mr. de Grood did not know, or appreciate, that his behaviour was morally wrong because he was operating under a delusion that he was being threatened at the time. Dr. Lenka Zedkova [ 122 ] Mr. de Grood also told Dr. Zedkova about his discussion with Mr. Rathwell who, according to Mr. de Grood, said to him at one point that “you can die before I do” which Mr. de Grood believed was a reference to the end of the world.

Mr. de Grood said that he felt threatened by the statement and soon heard a male voice he believed to be that of the Sun God saying “kill them all before they kill you”. Mr. de Grood then said that he knew that he had to defend himself because he was about to be killed. Mr. de Grood told Dr. Zedkova that, while stabbing the five individuals, he was acting in self-defence.

[ 123 ] Manifestations of the paranoia exhibited by Mr. de Grood during the night of April 14 as described to Dr. Zedkova included his refusal to accept an offer of a cup of tea from Mr. Regnault because he believed it was poisoned and writing his name on a pop can to serve as a decoy to trick those who wished to poison him. [ 124 ] Dr. Zedkova refers to Mr. de Grood being consumed by conspiracy theories for several weeks prior to the night of April 14 and his fear that he would be killed.

When she considers all of Mr. de Grood’s behaviour prior to the night in question together with his statements and behaviour that night, Dr. Zedkova concludes that it “seems to support Mr. De Grood’s claim that, in his mind, the killing was morally justified as he believed that he was going to be killed”. Dr. Zedkova concluded her report by stating that, although Mr. de Grood appeared to appreciate the nature and quality of his act, it was her opinion that his psychotic symptoms prevented him from appreciating the moral wrongfulness of his act. Dr.

Andrew Haag [ 125 ] In considering all of the information and evidence presented to him, Dr. Haag concluded that Mr. De Grood certainly did know and could foresee the physical consequences of his actions. He clearly knew that people would be seriously harmed by his actions and indicated that he tried to kill his victims quickly and humanely. However, it is Dr. Haag’s opinion that Mr. De Grood did not know that his actions were morally wrong at the time. He indicated to Dr.

Haag that he had to kill his victims and saw his actions as a “kill or be killed situation.” In his mind, Mr. de Grood was acting in self-defence at the time. [ 126 ] Mr. de Grood killed the five individuals after his friends had already left. He believed his friends to be on the same side as he was (the good side), while those remaining behind were part of the evil conspiracy. He did not know his victims, and believed that he had to kill them before they killed him. Indeed, he acknowledged that had there been others present, he would have had to kill them as well. [ 127 ] Dr.

Haag opines that the rationale that propelled Mr. De Grood’s actions probably had its bases in delusions and hallucinations and involved multiple psychotic experiences and thoughts. He believed that the world was going to end, that those around him were the Illuminati, and that he had to kill to escape the situation. [ 128 ] Dr. Haag concludes that on a balance of probabilities, Mr. De Grood lacked the ability to know that his actions, at the time of the index offences, were morally wrong.

Conclusion on the Effects of Matthew de Grood’s Mental Disorder [ 129 ] Each of the three experts concludes that Mr. de Grood did appreciate the nature and quality of his acts in stabbing his victims but did not know, or appreciate, that his behaviour was morally wrong as he was acting under a delusion that he was being threatened at the time. Having reviewed all of the evidence, I again accept the opinions of the experts and I find on a balance of probabilities that at the time of these acts by Mr. de Grood, he did not know or appreciate that his actions were morally wrong.

c) Possibility of Malingering [ 130 ] A question that is integral to the analysis and must be addressed in cases such as this is whether it is possible that an accused is malingering or feigning a mental illness. Each of the three experts was asked to consider this possibility as it relates to Mr. de Grood and each was referred to a number of factors that might be considered as “red flags” or indicia of possible malingering. [ 131 ] The opinions of the experts are as follows: Dr. Alberto Choy [ 132 ] Dr.

Choy states, in his report, that it is unlikely that Mr. de Grood “has been dissimulating or malingering his condition.” Dr. Choy refers to the multiple delusions experienced by Mr. de Grood and how they were consistent both prior to the offences and after the offences. Further, they had been expressed in different settings, including his home, his work and online. The randomness of his delusional beliefs, according to Dr. Choy, “supports the notion that he was genuinely psychotic because of the disorganization that can occur in this state”. [ 133 ] Dr.

Choy considered numerous factors that might suggest malingering, including Mr. de Grood’s education, internet searches, accurate memory of the stabbings, understanding of legal rights including an NCR defence, and others, but discounted them after considering all of the facts presented. Neither individually nor cumulatively did Dr. Choy believe they were consistent with malingering by Mr. de Grood.

He stated that it is unlikely that an individual such as Mr. de Grood, without intimate prior knowledge of, and experience with, psychiatric treatment, could so consistently present realistic symptoms, sustain them over a number of months, and then present such a realistic course of improvement after treatment. Dr. Choy concluded that it is highly unlikely that Mr. De Grood has been malingering his psychosis. Dr. Lenka Zedkova [ 134 ] In Dr. Zedkova’s opinion, it is highly unlikely that Mr. de Grood was feigning his symptoms.

She also considered such factors as his inconsistent statements of the evils he was facing (Illuminati, werewolves or zombies), his education, internet searches, accurate memory of the stabbings, understanding of legal rights including an NCR defence, and others, but concluded that none of them support a diagnosis that he was malingering. [ 135 ] Dr. Zedkova noted Mr. de Grood’s behaviour for several weeks prior to the offences when there “did not seem to be any obvious secondary gain from being perceived as mentally ill at the time”. Apart from the positive symptoms of schizophrenia, such as

hearing voices or having paranoid delusions, Dr. Zedkova opined that Mr. de Grood “appeared rather thought disordered which is more difficult to fake”. [ 136 ] In her report, Dr. Zedkova also discussed alternative hypotheses for Mr. de Grood’s behaviour. She discounts the possibilities of anger and frustration as causes stating that it is difficult to accept that such an extreme reaction could be elicited from a social situation in someone with no prior severe personality pathology and functioning.

She also discounts anxiety as a possible cause as there is little to suggest that he was experiencing stress or conflict that could be considered as out of the ordinary. [ 137 ] Dr. Zedkova concludes that the collateral information she received and reviewed identified a much more likely motivation for Mr. de Grood’s aggressive reaction with the overwhelming evidence of the content of the delusions before and after the offences. That is, he did suffer from an acute psychotic episode and was not malingering. Dr. Andrew Haag [ 138 ] In considering the possibility of malingering, Dr.

Haag considered the issue in three ways. First, Dr. Haag concluded that Mr. de Good was demonstrating psychotic symptoms in multiple contexts and to multiple people consistently prior to the index offences. The consistency of psychotic presentation in multiple contexts was consistent with Mr. de Grood’s symptoms being genuine. [ 139 ] Second, when questioning Mr. de Grood, Dr. Haag asked questions that would have encouraged particular responses from one who was malingering.

Mr. de Grood’s responses, however, were consistent with his condition being genuine. [ 140 ] Third, upon administering a personal inventory testing, Mr. de Grood’s results indicated that he was under reporting his symptoms. In Dr. Haag’s view, this is inconsistent with an individual malingering his psychotic symptoms. [ 141 ] Dr. Haag also addressed the same factors considered by Dr. Choy and Dr. Zedkova as possibly evidencing malingering, and he too concluded that they were neither inconsistent with his diagnosis of a mental disorder nor suggestive of malingering. [ 142 ] Dr.

Haag concluded that it was not likely that Mr. de Grood was malingering. Conclusion on the Possibility of Malingering [ 143 ] While all of the factors that could possibly suggest malingering have been considered by the experts, there are two that merit further comment. The first relates to the fact that Mr. de Grood received a Bachelor of Science degree (with distinction) with a major in Psychology and a minor in Law and Society.

While his psychology courses may have provided Mr. de Grood with some general academic knowledge, I am persuaded by the expert opinions that such general knowledge could not have provided him with the ability to display consistent psychotic symptoms in multiple settings, to multiple unconnected people. I am further persuaded that he could not have presented such a realistic course of improvement after treatment. [ 144 ] The second relates to Mr. de Grood’s desire to pursue an NCR offence, as told to Dr. Choy, Dr. Zedkova and Dr. Haag.

His comments were made at a time when Mr. de Grood had been determined to be fit to stand trial. By that time, he understood the charges he was facing, the options available to him and, generally, the potential outcomes of the trial. [ 145 ] In view of the opinions expressed by the medical experts and the evidence presented at trial, there is no basis to conclude that Mr. de Grood was malingering. Such a conclusion would be mere speculation. VI.

Conclusion [ 146 ] It has been established beyond a reasonable doubt that, in the early morning of April 15, 2014, Matthew Douglas de Grood caused the deaths of five young people: Joshua Barclay Hunter, Zackariah James Rathwell, Kaitlan Ashley Perras, Jordan Gabriel Segura and Lawrence Martin Hong. [ 147 ] I find on a balance of probabilities that at the time he caused their deaths, Matthew de Grood was suffering from a mental disorder that rendered him incapable of appreciating or knowing that his actions were wrong. [ 148 ] Therefore, and in accordance with s. 672.34 of the Criminal Code , I find that Matthew Douglas de Grood committed the acts that resulted in the deaths of these five individuals but he is not criminally responsible for those deaths on account of mental disorder.

Heard on the 16 th to 19 th and the 24 th to 25 th days of May, 2016. Dated at the City of Calgary, Alberta this 25 th day of May, 2016.

Eric F. Macklin J.C.Q.B.A. Appearances: Neil Wiberg, QC Stephanie Brown Crown Prosecutor's Office for the Crown Allan Fay Michael Miller Fay Snukal & Associates for the Accused