R v Markov (a pseudonym)

The case of R v Markov involved the defendant, Markov, charged with the murder of his wife by strangulation. The court was required to determine whether Markov was mentally unfit to be held criminally responsible for the offence. Both experts and parties agreed that Markov was suffering from a mental health impairment at the time of the offence, though there was some dispute regarding the consistency of his statements to the police with his history of delusions. The court had to decide whether the defence of mental health impairment was established and whether the onus of proof lay with Markov.

The court considered the evidence of Markov's delusions, hearing voices, and other symptoms of mental illness. It examined the explanation provided by the expert psychiatrist for the inconsistency in Markov's statements. The court was satisfied that there was a "plethora" of evidence demonstrating Markov's mental illness, and that the defence lawyer had briefed the psychiatrist shortly after Markov was charged, which did not affect the impartiality of the expert's opinion. The court held that the onus of proof was on Markov to establish the defence of mental health impairment, and that this onus had been met. Accordingly, the court entered a special verdict of not guilty by reason of mental health impairment.

Consequently, the court made orders for Markov's detention and referral to the Mental Health Review Tribunal. This decision highlights the importance of the consistency and comprehensiveness of evidence in establishing a defence of mental health impairment, and the careful consideration required when assessing the onus of proof in such cases.