Re McGregor

[2007] QMHC 5

MENTAL HEALTH COURT

CITATION:

Re McGregor  [2007] QMHC 005

PARTIES:

REFERENCE BY THE DEFENDANT’S LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE IN RESPECT OF ANDREW CHRISTOPHER MCGREGOR

FILE NO/S:

Proceeding No 0031 of 2006

DELIVERED ON:

30 April 2007

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

12 April 2007

JUDGE:

Philippides J

ASSISTING
 PSYCHIATRISTS:

Dr Wood
Dr Lawrence

FINDINGS AND ORDER:

1. That the defendant was of unsound mind at the time of the alleged offences as described in Schedule 2 of the Mental Health Act 2000 (Qld)

2. That the defendant be detained as a forensic patient at The Park High Security Program Authorised Mental Health Service

CATCHWORDS:

MENTAL HEALTH – DECLARATION OR FINDING OF MENTAL ILLNESS OR INCAPACITY – where defendant charged with murder – where psychiatric evidence that defendant suffered from paranoid schizophrenia and drug dependence – whether intentional intoxication contributed to offending behaviour – whether defendant was of unsound mind as defined in Schedule 2 of the Mental Health Act2000 (Qld) at the time of the alleged offences – whether forensic order necessary – whether limited community treatment should be approved

Mental Health Act2000 (Qld), Schedule 2

COUNSEL:

Mr D Shepherd for the defendant
Mr J Tate for the Director of Mental Health

Ms C Kelly for the Director of Public Prosecutions

SOLICITORS:

Legal Aid for the defendant
Crown Law for the Director of Mental health
The Director of Public Prosecutions (Qld)

1. PHILIPPIDES J: The defendant, Andrew Christopher McGregor, is charged with the murder of his girlfriend, Joanna Scriha on 27 December 2005.  The matter of the defendant’s mental condition at the time of the alleged offence has been referred to this Court.

1. There is no dispute that the defendant killed his girlfriend on 27 December 2005.  At the time, they were living in a tent on a Mackay beach as they had been evicted from the boarding house that they were previously living in.  A fellow camper, Stephen Van der Kaay, became acquainted with the couple on 22 December 2005.  Mr Van der Kaay gave police a statement of events on 27 December 2005.  He told police that at about 1.30 am on the morning of the killing the defendant had had four to five cones of cannabis using a bong at Mr Van der Kaay’s campsite.  Mr Van der Kaay said that the defendant did not seem any different after having the cones, although he did say unusual things and at times he drifted off into blank spells of staring into space.  However, he had been saying unusual things before taking the cones; for example that he had “cracked the code to prayers”.

1. The defendant borrowed Mr Van der Kaay’s torch and walked back to his own campsite.  Soon after, Mr Van der Kaay heard a series of thuds.  He came across the defendant who admitted having smashed the torch.  It seems the defendant later indicated he did this because the torch gave him a tingly electric shock, which he thought showed that the torch was evil.  Mr Van der Kaay went to the defendant’s campsite where he found Ms Scriha sitting up and apparently well. She told the defendant to stop annoying people and Mr Van der Kaay left them bickering at about 2.20 am. 

1. Shortly after, at about 2.30 am, Mr Van der Kaay again heard a number of dull thuds and heard Ms Scriha say, “Just get out.  That’s it.”  There were muffled voices and a further series of thuds followed by Ms Scriha’s calls for help.  Mr Van der Kaay dialled 000 on his mobile, telling police that he could hear the defendant “bashing” Ms Scriha and giving them the location details.  Police attended the tent and found Ms Scriha dead with trauma and bleeding to her head. 

1. Ms Scriha was found by police, who interviewed and arrested the defendant.   He had gone to the police station with a made up story of having himself been assaulted by a stranger. 

1. However, he soon admitted to the police that he had killed Ms Scriha.  He said he punched her in the head with a closed fist and tried to strangle her with his hands.  He told police that he did this because he believed that “she was Satan and that he was making the world a better place”.  He said that voices were telling him to do it and that he had hallucinations.   He told police he had had voices in his head for the last two years. 

1. Psychometric assessments of the defendant indicate that his full scale IQ is in the low average range.  The defendant has had more than 20 admissions to the Mackay Base Hospital Inpatient Mental Health Service between 1999 and 2005.  He has had a number of diagnoses from schizoaffective disorder to drug-related psychosis and from antisocial to borderline personality depending on presentation at the time.  The defendant’s variable history of use of amphetamines and cannabis has contributed to the fluctuant clinical picture.  He has a long history of using speed and marijuana dating back to his late teens.  The defendant also abused the prescription preparation paroxetine, an antidepressant, stating that he would take ten to fifteen tablets per day.  The defendant reported being trialled on various antipsychotics and antidepressants, but admitted being poorly compliant with medication. 

1. In the weeks leading up to the incident, the defendant was seen at the Emergency Department at Mackay Hospital.  On 20 November 2005, he was brought to the Emergency Department by police.  He was seeking admission because he had been evicted from his caravan and had nowhere to stay.  At this time he was assessed as not showing signs of psychosis or other mental health disorder. On 8 December 2005, the defendant consulted the Emergency Department saying he was “unable to cope” and he sought more medication, which was provided to him. 

1. The defendant’s parents had over a period of time voiced concerns in respect of their son’s mental condition.  According to the defendant’s parents, the defendant had believed that “he was God for a long time now” and heard voices “telling him to kill women and children.”  They were very concerned that he had been detained for only short periods in the high dependency unit of the Mackay Base Hospital and of the prospect of violence towards others. 

1. The court has the benefit of clinical reports and oral evidence from Dr Fama and Dr Kingswell, who were able to have regard to a large volume of material, including medical records from the Mackay Base Hospital.  Dr Fama interviewed the defendant on 26 April 2006, some four months after the alleged offence.  He diagnosed the defendant as suffering from paranoid schizophrenia and multiple drug dependence.  He considered the defendant’s psychosis to be of a persistent, severe and treatment resistant nature.  In Dr Fama’s opinion, the defendant was suffering from paranoid schizophrenia at the time of the incident, characterised by paranoid delusions which he revealed to the police and which he reiterated subsequently. 

1. The defendant told Dr Fama about daily voices that he heard in his head.  The defendant told Dr Fama that he had special gifts, telling Dr Fama that, “Anyone could be God – I still believe that now.  I’ve got gifts that no-one else has”.  He told Dr Fama that he was feeling mentally very sick by Christmas Eve of 2005 and that he “couldn’t think”.  Dr Fama reported that the defendant bitterly regrets killing his girlfriend, but at the same time sought to attribute his actions to some malign influence outside his personal control.   For example, the defendant blamed the torch for the incident, thinking electricity from the torch may have been in his system.

1. After interviewing the defendant and considering the very extensive collateral material, Dr Fama concluded that at the relevant time, the defendant was grossly deluded and was driven by his delusions so as to be deprived of the capacity to know that he ought not to do the act.  Dr Fama did not consider that the defendant’s consumption of cannabis had contributed to his delusional state and the relevant deprivation of capacity, since the defendant’s history during custody has been of continued and prolonged psychosis in the absence of illicit drug access.  The most effect that Dr Fama could reasonably attribute to the cannabis was some possible impairment of the capacity to control actions.  Dr Fama therefore supported a defence of unsoundness of mind on the basis of a mental disease resulting in deprivation of the capacity of knowing. 

1. Dr Kingswell interviewed the defendant on 3 October 2006 for a report dated 9 October 2006.  The defendant told Dr Kingswell that he could hear many voices all day long.  He said that sometimes he could not help but listen to the voices and that “they would tell him to do things”.  He said that the voices told him he was Jesus Christ or God and that he often felt that he was Jesus or God and that he was on earth to help people.  He said that his problems had been most evident for about two months prior to his offending and that his difficulties worsened after he and his girlfriend were evicted from the boarding house. 

1. Dr Kingswell considered that the defendant suffered from a chronic psychotic illness, characterised by hallucination, delusion and oddities of thought and behaviour for the last seven years.  He opined that the course of the illness was worsened by disorganised and at times antisocial behaviour and drug use.  He noted the defendant’s behaviour was quite disorganised before the killing and that the police interview given soon after revealed the defendant to be very thought disordered with poverty of content of thought and fragmented delusions.  At the time of interview, Dr Kingswell opined the defendant still remained psychotic. 

1. Dr Kingswell considered that the defendant was, at the time of the offence, suffering from chronic paranoid schizophrenia and that his illness was of sufficient severity so as to have deprived him of the capacity to know that he ought not kill Ms Scriha.  Dr Kingswell was of the view that intoxication from the cannabis consumed by the defendant prior to the killing did not impact on the defendant’s mental state which resulted in a deprivation of capacity. 

1. Dr Kingswell noted the defendant’s very poor insight and judgment.  The defendant failed to recognise his auditory hallucinations and delusions of reference as evidence of mental illness and was not prepared to take medication long term.  Dr Kingswell’s prognosis was poor, given the early onset of the disorder in a man of limited intellect with polysubstance abuse problems.

1. I am satisfied on the material before the Court that the defendant suffered from a severe mental disease at the relevant time, namely chronic paranoid schizophrenia.  I am also satisfied that as a result of that mental illness there was a deprivation of the capacity to know that the act was wrong and that the use of cannabis did not contribute to any extent to that deprivation.  In those circumstances, I find that the defendant was of unsound mind at the relevant time.

1. A forensic order is certainly warranted in the circumstances of this case, given the seriousness of the alleged offence, the extensive treatment needs of the defendant and the need to safeguard the community.  Accordingly, I order that the defendant be detained as a forensic patient in The Park High Security Program Authorised Mental Health Service.  There is clearly no question currently of limited community treatment. 

1. It is appropriate that a record of the proceedings be provided to the treating team and to the Mental Health Review Tribunal on the occasion of any review of the forensic order.  It is also appropriate that Mrs Scriha’s letter, which has been tendered to the court, in relation to a non-contact order be provided to the treating team and to the Tribunal in relation to any further review of the forensic order.