Her Majesty the Queen - v. -, 2016 SKPC 042

IN THE PROVINCIAL COURT OF SASKATCHEWAN YOUTH JUSTICE COURT Citation: 2016 SKPC 042 Date: March 21, 2016 Information: 33643853 Location: Prince Albert _____________________________________________________________________________ Between: Her Majesty the Queen - and - W.R.H.S Appearing: Cam Scott For the Crown Terra Lennox-Zepp For the Defence Note: Sections 110 and 111 of The Youth Criminal Justice Act contain prohibitions against publication of a name or other information that would identify someone as either a young person being dealt with under the Act , or as a child or young person who is a victim or a witness in relation to an offence alleged under the Act .

_____________________________________________________________________________ DECISION H.M. HARRADENCE , J _____________________________________________________________________________ [ 1 ] It is alleged that this youth stabbed his grandmother on March 3, 2016. He is charged with assault with a weapon. The Crown has made an application, based on s. 672.12(3) of the Criminal Code , for an assessment to determine whether the youth was suffering from a mental disorder at the time of the alleged offence so as to exempt him from criminal responsibility. [ 2 ] This youth is in custody.

In addition to the charge which forms the basis of this application he is charged with the following offences, all of which pre-date March 3, 2016: On or about the 18 th day of August, A.D. 2015 at or near Prince Albert, Saskatchewan did steal personal property, the property of Terri Lynn Doucette, of a value not exceeding five thousand dollars, contrary to

section 334 (

b) of the Criminal Code ; On or about the 18 th day of August, A.D. 2015, at or near Prince Albert, Saskatchewan did not being authorized under the Firearms Act to carry concealed, a weapon, to wit: a knife, did carry it concealed, contrary to

section 90 of the Criminal Code ; On or about the 3 rd day of September, A.D. 2015 at or near Prince Albert, Saskatchewan did being at large on his undertaking given to a justice or a judge and being bound to comply with a condition thereof, to wit: report to a youth worker at 12 th Floor, 800 Central Avenue, McIntosh Mall, Prince Albert, SK, Ph: 306-953-2643 or toll free 1-866-397-7826 or 1-888-953-3299 immediately.

Continue to report and be supervised as told to do so by the youth worker or designate assigned to you, fail without lawful excuse to comply with that condition contrary to section 145(3) of the Criminal Code ; On or about the 9 th day of October, A.D. 2015 at or near Prince Albert, Saskatchewan did having appeared before Saskatchewan Provincial Court did fail, without lawful excuse, to attend Court as required by the Court contrary to section 145(2) (

b) of the Criminal Code ; and On or about the 6 th day of December, A.D. 2015 at or near Prince Albert, Saskatchewan did being at large on his undertaking given to a justice or a judge and being bound to comply with a condition thereof, to wit: stay inside your residence from 11:00 PM each night to 7:00 AM the next morning unless you have prior written permission of your youth worker or designate to be outside your approved residence during your curfew, fail without lawful excuse to comply with that condition, contrary to section 145(3) of the Criminal Code . [ 3 ] The Crown does not allege that this youth has a criminal record.

A brief review of the facts will place this application in context. On August 19, 2015, this youth was released from custody on an Undertaking with strict conditions. He was arrested and remanded into custody on December 7, 2015. At that time, a Judicial Interim Release Report was ordered. On December 8, 2015, Tammy Armitstead completed a Judicial Interim Release Report in which she indicated that the youth had recently been hospitalized for ten days under the care of a psychiatrist, Dr. Taj, at the Victoria Hospital in Prince Albert. Apparently Dr. Taj had recommended Seroquel but Ms.

Armitstead reports that this youth was refusing to attend appointments or take medication as he does not believe he needs to be treated for anything. [ 4 ] The remand of the youth continued and on December 11, 2015, the youth justice Court (herein after the Court) ordered an educational psychological assessment to determine if the youth has a learning disability. On December 17, 2015, Rosa Camponi, Registered Psychologist in the Forensic Youth Outpatient Program, responded by letter. In the letter Ms.

Camponi indicated that “learning disability assessments are prepared by educational psychologists who are most commonly employed by school districts” therefore, the Prince Albert Mental Health Centre could not complete the order. [ 5 ] In a letter dated January 8, 2016, addressed to the Court, Melanie Wozniak, Child Care Worker, Youth Resource Unit, Child and Family Services, indicates that this youth is currently under the medical care of Dr. M.Z. Hussain, a Psychiatrist in Prince Albert, who has indicated to her that the youth requires hospitalization as “he is very sick” and “could hurt someone”.

As well, on January 8, 2016, Defence counsel indicated to the Court that she was unable to obtain instructions from this youth.

[ 6 ] The Court was satisfied on January 8, 2016, that there existed reasonable grounds to order a fitness assessment. As a result, this youth was remanded to Saskatchewan Hospital for the purposes of the assessment. He was assessed at Saskatchewan Hospital by Dr. Lindsay Robertson, Psychologist, and Dr. Kingsley Nwachukwu, Psychiatrist. Both of these doctors have filed reports with the Court dated February 2, 2016. [ 7 ] Dr. Robertson, in her psychological report, notes under the heading “Presentation”, the following observations: Mr.

S. presented as a highly paranoid, oppositional individual with catatonic features. He exhibited bizarre behaviour with odd posture and abnormal breathing and speech patterns. Rigidity in his movements was noted. He often stared intensely at the writer as if to intimidate and then his eyes would widen and he would take a deep breath in before responding to questions. He expressed concern that he was “running out of breath” and tended to only speak when exhaling.

He voiced delusional beliefs of a religious nature and reported feeling conflicted about loving his fellow man but disliking people and wanting to cause them harm. He presented as defiant and oppositional at times and he tended to respond to questions in an adversarial manner. He frequently stated that he did not understand a question or asked why a question was being asked of him. However, when given an opportunity to respond, his responses were generally appropriate, albeit brief.

Although he denied experiencing auditory and visual hallucinations, he believed that staff had asked questions of him that had not been asked and he had a tendency to misinterpret the behaviour of others. [ 8 ] Dr. Nwachukwu, in his psychiatric report, notes the following: W. S. is a teenager who is tall and slim. He was kempt but inappropriately behaved. He was bizarre in his presentation, and occasionally laughed inappropriately. He exhibited abnormal posturing and maneric movements where he would repeatedly stretch his body, stiffen up and breathe in deeply.

He engaged poorly but maintained fairly good eye contact. He spoke very little and he was extremely guarded. There were possible abnormalities in his thought content and form. There were possible psychotic symptoms. He denied any suicidal or homicidal idea or intent. His insight was limited. [ 9 ] In relation to the mental health of this youth, Dr. Robertson notes in her report: Mr. S. has a history of mental health difficulties; that being a psychotic disorder. His mental health was noted to deteriorate around the age of 13 when he started using substances.

He was diagnosed and treated for Drug Induced Psychosis in November 2015; however, he failed to comply with treatment. Given the persistence and severity of his psychotic symptoms during his admission to the Forensic Unit despite receiving treatment, it is my opinion that his mental health difficulties are not substance induced. Instead, his presentation is consistent with the diagnosis of Schizophrenia. [ 10 ] Dr.

Nwachukwu concurs and opines that the youth’s psychotic disorder is possibly enduring: He has background unspecified schizophrenia and other psychotic disorder and significant substance use disorder as specified above. Even though his psychotic disorder might have been induced by substance use, his psychotic disorder is possibly currently enduring. He would really need to comply with treatment and abstain from substances for considerable length of time to prevent further deterioration in his mental state. [ 11 ] A fitness hearing was scheduled to proceed on March 2, 2016. The hearing did not proceed.

A show cause hearing was held in which representatives of the Ministry of Social Services were consulted by the Court and a release plan formulated. As a result, the Court ordered this youth’s release on an Undertaking. [ 12 ] Unfortunately, the next day, March 3, 2016, this youth was charged with assault with a weapon. The alleged victim is his grandmother. [ 13 ] Mr. Scott, representing the Crown on this application, states that the facts surrounding this charge do not disclose a reason or motive for it.

The alleged stabbing of his grandmother by this youth appears to have been random and unprovoked, according to the Crown. Ms. Lennox-Zepp, who appeared with the youth on January 8, 2016, as well as on the date of this application, stated that her instructions were to oppose the Crown’s application. [ 14 ] The Crown’s application is brought pursuant to s. 672.12(3) of the Criminal Code . This

section reads as follows: 672.12(3) Where the prosecutor applies for an assessment in order to determine whether the accused was suffering from a mental disorder at the time of the offence so as to be exempt from criminal responsibility, the court may only order the assessment if

(

a) the accused puts his or her mental capacity for criminal intent into issue; or (

b) the prosecutor satisfies the court that there are reasonable grounds to doubt that the accused is criminally responsible for the allegedoffence, on account of mental disorder. (emphasis added) [15] The basis for criminal responsibility is voluntariness. Justice LeBel, in R v Bouchard-Lebrun, [2011] 3 SCR 575, 2011 SCC58, summarizes this principle as follows: [45] According to a traditional fundamental principle of the common law, criminal responsibility can result only from the commissionof a voluntary act.

This important principle is based on a recognition that it would be unfair in a democratic society to impose theconsequences and stigma of criminal responsibility on an accused who did not voluntarily commit

an act that constitutes a criminaloffence. [46] For

an act to be considered voluntary in the criminal law, it must be the product of the accused person’s free will. As TaschereauJ. stated in R. v. King, (SCC), [1962] S.C.R. 746, “there can be no actus reus unless it is the result of a willing mind atliberty to make a definite choice or decision, or in other words, there must be a willpower to do

an act whether the accused knew or notthat it was prohibited by law” (p. 749). This means that no one can be found criminally responsible for an involuntary act (see DicksonJ.’s dissenting reasons in Rabey v. The Queen, (SCC), [1980] 2 S.C.R. 513, which were endorsed on this point in R. v.Parks, (SCC), [1992] 2 S.C.R. 871). [16] As is recognized by the Ontario Court of Appeal in R v Richmond, 2016 ONCA 134, criminal responsibility is not negated bya mental illness unless it is proven that the illness was of such a degree as to render the accused not criminally responsible. [17] Section 16(1) of the Criminal Code states as follows: 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. [18] As stated by Justice Currie in R v Brooks, 2006 SKQB 2, 2006 CarswellSask 1, 274 Sask R 195, 66 WCB (2d) 296, thequestion is whether the mental disorder rendered the youth incapable of appreciating the nature and quality of his acts or knowing whathe did was wrong. [19] I have before me a youth who has been diagnosed as schizophrenic. According to Dr.

Robertson, when she saw himapproximately 30 days before the alleged offence, he exhibited highly paranoid, oppositional and catatonic features as well as voicingdelusional beliefs. Dr. Nwachukwu assessed this youth as schizophrenic with a significant substance abuse disorder. Dr.

Nwachukwuwas of the further view that this youth exhibited possible abnormalities in thought and content and possible psychotic symptoms. [20] This recent medical history combined with the alleged inexplicable attack on his grandmother with a knife, satisfies me thatthere are reasonable grounds to doubt that this youth is criminally responsible for the alleged offence. [21] I therefore order that this youth be assessed pursuant to s. 672.12 of the Criminal Code by Dr.

Olajide Adelugba to determinewhether the youth at the time of the commission of the alleged offence of assault with a weapon on March 3, 2016, was suffering from amental disorder so to exempt him from criminal responsibility by virtue of s. 16(1) of the Criminal Code. I order that this assessment becompleted by April 25, 2016. I further order that the accused be transported to Saskatoon to be detained at Kilburn Hall for the purposesof this assessment. [22] The assessment should be provided to the Court by April 25, 2016, and thereafter distributed to Counsel.

Dated this 21st day of March, A.D. 2016, at the City of Prince Albert, in the Province of Saskatchewan. ________________________ H.M. Harradence, J