Re Fisher - [2015] QMHC 4

MENTAL HEALTH COURT

CITATION:

Re Fisher [2015] QMHC 4

PARTIES:

REFERENCE BY THE DIRECTOR OF MENTAL HEALTH IN RESPECT OF DAVID FISHER

FILE NO/S:

No 0173 of 2013

DELIVERED ON:

20 March 2015

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

11 February 2015 and 12 February 2015

JUDGE:

Boddice J

ASSISTING PSYCHIATRISTS:

Dr J Lawrence
Dr N McVie

FINDINGS AND ORDER:

1. At the time of the alleged offence of murder, the subject of the reference, the defendant was not suffering from unsoundness of mind as defined in the Schedule to the Mental Health Act 2000 (Qld).

2. At the time of the alleged offence of murder, the defendant was suffering from diminished responsibility as defined in the Schedule to the Mental Health Act 2000 (Qld).

3. In respect of the remaining alleged offences the subject of the reference, the defendant was not suffering from unsoundness of mind as defined in the Schedule to the Mental Health Act 2000 (Qld).

4. In respect of each of the alleged offences the subject of the reference, the defendant is fit for trial.

5. The proceeding against the defendant for manslaughter by reason of diminished responsibility continue according to law.

6. The proceeding in respect of the remaining alleged offences continue according to law.

7. Copies of the reports, and of the transcript, are to be released to the parties in the criminal proceedings.

CATCHWORDS:

MENTAL HEALTH – DECLARATION OR FINDING OF MENTAL ILLNESS OR INCAPACITY – where defendant charged with murder – whether defendant was of unsound mind as defined in the Schedule of the Mental Health Act 2000 (Qld) at the time of that offence – where the defendant had schizophrenia – whether defendant was intoxicated by cannabis, a synthetic cannabinoid and mescaline at the time of the offences – whether intoxication contributed to the defendant’s state of mind at the relevant times

COUNSEL:

T A Fuller QC for the Director of Public Prosecutions
J Tate for the Director of Mental Health

J D Briggs for the Defendant

SOLICITORS:

Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions
Crown Law for the Director of Mental Health

Legal Aid Queensland for the Defendant

BODDICE J: By reference filed 19 June 2013, the Director of Mental Health referred to this Court the mental condition of David Fisher at the time of alleged offences of murder, possession of dangerous drugs and possession of utensils or pipes, all alleged to have been committed on 23 June 2012.
There is no dispute the defendant is currently fit for trial. There is also no dispute that the defendant was not deprived of any of the relevant capacities such as to support a defence of unsoundness of mind in respect of the alleged offences of possessing a dangerous drug and possessing utensils or pipes.
At issue is whether the defendant was suffering unsoundness of mind, or diminished responsibility, at the time of the alleged offence of murder, having regard to the use of various intoxicating substances on the day in question. A…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Re Fisher

Details

AGLC: Re Fisher [2015] QMHC 4
Case: [2015] QMHC 4
Decision Date: 20 March 2015

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Re Fisher is before the Queensland Supreme Court, where the primary issue is whether the defendant, who is charged with murder, was suffering from an unsound mind at the time of the offence. The court must determine if the defendant's schizophrenia and intoxication from substances such as cannabis, a synthetic cannabinoid known as K2, and mescaline contributed to his state of mind. The court also considers the question of the defendant's future management if a finding of unsoundness of mind is made. The defendant, born in 1973, had experienced depression in his late teens, which seemed to resolve. However, in the years leading up to the alleged offences, his mental state deteriorated, marked by radical religious views, self-absorption, drug use, and struggles with everyday tasks.

The legal issues before the court include the interpretation of "unsoundness of mind" under the Mental Health Act 2000 (Qld) and whether the defendant's intoxication played a significant role in his mental state at the time of the offence. The court must also determine if the defendant's schizophrenia alone, or in combination with his intoxication, meets the criteria for unsoundness of mind. Furthermore, the court has to consider the impact of these factors on the defendant's capacity to understand the nature and quality of his act or to know that what he was doing was wrong. The court's decision hinges on the interplay between the defendant's diagnosed mental illness, his intoxication, and the specific legal definitions provided by the Mental Health Act.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

Background

Background to the litigation

At issue is whether the defendant was suffering unsoundness of mind, or diminished responsibility, at the time of the alleged offence of murder, having regard to the use of various intoxicating substances on the day in question. A subsidiary issue is the question of future management, if a finding of unsoundness of mind is made.Background The defendant was born on 1 August 1973. At the time of the alleged offences he was living with his wife and five children. The victim was his six–month-old son. There are four other children, all daughters, aged 10, 8, 6 and 5 years. The defendant left home after completing Grade 10. In his late teens he experienced incidents of depression. During this time he was estranged from his parents. However, these incidents of depression appeared to have resolved as he entered adulthood. The defendant later enjoyed relatively stable employment running a floor-covering business. He also enjoyed a stable family home life, with a strong connection to his church. In the two years prior to the alleged offences, the defendant reported being asked to leave his church because of his views of God and religion. He also sold his business. These changes coincided with him and his wife making a joint decision to adopt a more alternative lifestyle. Thereafter, friends and acquaintances reported changes in the defendant. He began to express more radical views of religion and his relationship with God. Other observations included a lack of respect for authority, becoming self-absorbed, being consumed by illegal drugs and struggling with everyday tasks. The illicit drugs used by the defendant during this period included mescaline, a synthetic cannabinoid known as K2, and magic mushrooms. His use of these substances increased significantly in the three months prior to the alleged offences. On the day of the alleged offences, he consumed a container of mescaline in the morning. He also consumed K2 on multiple occasions throughout the course of that day. Mescaline is a hallucinogenic alkaloid similar to MDMA or ecstasy. Onset of its effect is rapid, occurring within one to two hours of ingestion and lasting up to 14 hours. Effects include central nervous system and sympathetic stimulation, intense visual and auditory hallucinations, anxiety, emotional instability, paranoia and flashbacks, as well as increased pulse rate, hyperthermia, flushing, sweating, piloerection, and abnormal gait. The half-life of the drug is estimated to be about six hours. Since 2008, synthetic cannabinoids have been detected in herbal mixtures, including K2. Synthetic cannabinoids are functionally similar to tetrahydrocannabinol (“THC”), the principal psychoactive component of cannabis. The effects are also similar to THC. The effects of THC include distortion of space and time, defects in short-term memory, difficulty in concentrating, slowing of reaction time, motor incoordination, impairment of highly automated functions such as tracking performance, and impairment in complex tasks that require divided attention. The adverse effects of synthetic cannabinoids may exceed those of THC in severity. Those adverse effects can also include hallucinations.Past psychiatric history

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.

CITATION:	Re Fisher [2015] QMHC 4
PARTIES:	REFERENCE BY THE DIRECTOR OF MENTAL HEALTH IN RESPECT OF DAVID FISHER
FILE NO/S:	No 0173 of 2013
DELIVERED ON:	20 March 2015
DELIVERED AT:	Brisbane
HEARING DATE:	11 February 2015 and 12 February 2015
JUDGE:	Boddice J
ASSISTING PSYCHIATRISTS:	Dr J Lawrence Dr N McVie
FINDINGS AND ORDER:	1. At the time of the alleged offence of murder, the subject of the reference, the defendant was not suffering from unsoundness of mind as defined in the Schedule to the Mental Health Act 2000 (Qld). *2. At the time of the alleged offence of murder, the defendant was suffering from diminished responsibility as defined in the Schedule to the Mental Health Act* 2000 (Qld). 3. In respect of the remaining alleged offences the subject of the reference, the defendant was not suffering from unsoundness of mind as defined in the Schedule to the Mental Health Act 2000 (Qld). 4. In respect of each of the alleged offences the subject of the reference, the defendant is fit for trial. 5. The proceeding against the defendant for manslaughter by reason of diminished responsibility continue according to law. 6. The proceeding in respect of the remaining alleged offences continue according to law. 7. Copies of the reports, and of the transcript, are to be released to the parties in the criminal proceedings.**
CATCHWORDS:	MENTAL HEALTH – DECLARATION OR FINDING OF MENTAL ILLNESS OR INCAPACITY – where defendant charged with murder – whether defendant was of unsound mind as defined in the Schedule of the Mental Health Act 2000 (Qld) at the time of that offence – where the defendant had schizophrenia – whether defendant was intoxicated by cannabis, a synthetic cannabinoid and mescaline at the time of the offences – whether intoxication contributed to the defendant’s state of mind at the relevant times
COUNSEL:	T A Fuller QC for the Director of Public Prosecutions J Tate for the Director of Mental Health J D Briggs for the Defendant
SOLICITORS:	Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions Crown Law for the Director of Mental Health Legal Aid Queensland for the Defendant