R v Gerrard-Collier
[2018] NZHC 1802
•20 July 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND ROTORUA REGISTRY
I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA
TE ROTORUA-NUI-A-KAHUMATAMOMOE ROHE
CRI-2018-087-334
[2018] NZHC 1802
THE QUEEN v
HOSEA JOEL GERRARD-COLLIER
Hearing: 20 July 2018 Appearances:
R W Jenson and O M Salt for Crown G Tomlinson for Defendant
Judgment:
20 July 2018
(ORAL) JUDGMENT OF LANG J
[on hearing conducted under s 20(2) of the Criminal Procedure (Mentally Impaired Persons Act) 2003]
R v GERRARD-COLLIER [2018] NZHC 1802 [20 July 2018]
[1] Mr Gerrard-Collier is charged with the murder of his deceased father’s partner, Robyn Crawford. He is also charged with causing the death of Ms Crawford’s unborn child. He has raised a defence based on insanity. As a result, I have conducted a hearing under s 20 of the Criminal Procedure (Mentally Impaired Persons) Act 2003 (the Act) to determine whether he should be found not guilty of the charges on the grounds of insanity.
The Crown case
[2] Mr Gerrard-Collier’s father died in December 2017. At the time of his death he was living with Ms Robyn Crawford, who was to become Mr Gerrard-Collier’s victim. At the time of her death Ms Crawford was pregnant with a child she had conceived with Mr Gerrard-Collier’s father.
[3] After his father’s death, Mr Gerrard-Collier began visiting Ms Crawford’s address in Opotiki on a sporadic basis. He would arrive unannounced and stay for one or two days before leaving again. Ms Crawford welcomed Mr Gerrard-Collier into her home and freely discussed the forthcoming birth of her child with him.
[4] On Saturday 17 February 2018, Mr Gerrard-Collier stayed the night at Ms Crawford’s address. He then returned to Whakatane, where he stayed the night. There is nothing to suggest the relationship between Mr Gerrard-Collier and Ms Crawford was in any way untoward when he left her address on the morning of 18 February.
[5] At 8.30 am the next morning, Mr Gerrard-Collier asked a female associate to drive him to a sports and goods store in Whakatane. At the store, he purchased a large machete and a sheath. His associate then drove him back to her address in Whakatane, where Mr Gerrard-Collier attached a strap to the sheath so that he could carry the machete on his back.
[6] At approximately 9 am, Mr Gerrard-Collier and his associate were picked up by a community service van. His associate had earlier arranged for the van to pick them up because he had told her he had an appointment with his probation officer in
Opotiki later in the day. When the van picked them up, Mr Gerrard-Collier gave the female driver a hug. She noted this as being out of character for him.
[7] Other persons were present in the van when Mr Gerrard-Collier got into it. Some of these people knew him and others did not. Mr Gerrard-Collier sat in the rear of the van with a backpack containing the machete and other personal items.
[8] Others in the van observed that Mr Gerrard-Collier did not speak to anyone during the trip to Opotiki. At one stage he was observed to be crying in the back of the van.
[9] The van arrived at the probation office in Opotiki at 9.50 am. When Mr Gerrard-Collier got out of the van he gave his associate a hug, which was also out of character for him. He then walked to the front door of the probation office but was unable to open it. He then spent approximately an hour in the main shopping area of Whakatane. During this period pedestrians observed him acting strangely. At times he was fidgeting and holding onto the machete.
[10] At about 11 am Mr Gerrard-Collier went to a beach, where he sat in the sand dunes for a period of time. A male associate approached him whilst he was there and offered him a cigarette, but Mr Gerrard-Collier declined the offer. Attempts by the associate to engage him in conversation were unsuccessful. The associate noted that Mr Gerrard-Collier looked angry and refused to engage in any communication with him.
[11] At about 12.10 pm, Mr Gerrard-Collier walked from the beach to Ms Crawford’s address. There was no one other than Ms Crawford home when he arrived. At some stage after he arrived Mr Gerrard-Collier knocked Ms Crawford onto the kitchen floor. Whilst she was on the ground he struck her with force several times with a sharp object, causing multiple severe wounds to her hands, arms, head and neck areas. He then struck her on at least three occasions with a blade on the face and head. One or more of these blows severed Ms Crawford’s jugular artery, and caused wounds to both sides of her neck. The wounds resulted in her suffering significant blood loss
and this subsequently led to her death. Ms Crawford’s unborn baby also died as a result of the injuries received by Ms Crawford.
[12] Mr Gerrard-Collier then walked through Ms Crawford’s address and was able to locate a key to her vehicle. He left the address in her vehicle and drove in an easterly direction towards East Cape. He eventually turned off the main highway near the Haparapara River. He drove along a rough track until the vehicle became stuck in boggy ground. He then attempted unsuccessfully to set fire to the vehicle.
[13] Mr Gerrard-Collier then walked back to the main road, where he was eventually picked up in the early afternoon by a member of the public. This person drove him to a medical centre where a wound to his leg was treated. The person who drove him to the medical centre tried to make conversation with him, but he would not respond to questions and was observed acting strangely. He appeared fixated on the river that the vehicle was driving past.
[14] At the medical centre Mr Gerrard-Collier gave a false name and was uncooperative with attempts to treat his wound. He rejected the advice of staff at the medical centre that he should go to the hospital for proper medical treatment. An attending doctor then sutured Mr Gerrard-Collier’s wound and he left the medical centre. Before he did so, he told staff that he wanted to get to Lottin Point. He then hitchhiked to Lottin Point, arriving there at about 8 pm that evening. At some stage during the evening or the early hours of the following morning, Mr Gerrard-Collier caught and killed a sheep belonging to a local farmer. He killed the sheep by cutting off its entire head. He then carried the sheep’s head around the Lottin Point beach area with him throughout the day of 20 February 2018. During the night of 19 February Mr Gerrard-Collier had lit a fire in the rocks and burned some of his personal possessions. He then hid the machete and sheath in an area of tree roots and grass, about 30 metres from the area where he had lit the fire in the vicinity of the sheep’s carcass.
[15] On the afternoon of 20 February 2018, two members of the public approached Mr Gerrard-Collier because they were concerned for his welfare after they noticed his
leg injury. They drove him to a local motel where the motelier contacted the police. The investigations then began into his involvement in Ms Crawford’s death.
The law
[16]Section 20 of the Act relevantly provides:
20 Finding of insanity
…
(2)Before or at a trial, the Judge must record a finding that the defendant is not guilty on account of his or her insanity if—
(a)the defendant indicates that he or she intends to raise the defence of insanity; and
(b)the prosecution agrees that the only reasonable verdict is not guilty on account of insanity; and
(c)the Judge is satisfied, on the basis of expert evidence, that the defendant was insane within the meaning of section 23 of the Crimes Act 1961 at the time of the commission of the offence.
…
[17] There is no dispute regarding the first factor set out in s 20(2)(a). Mr Gerrard- Collier has squarely raised the defence of insanity.
[18] Section 20(2)(b) is also satisfied because the prosecution agrees that the only reasonable verdict is one of not guilty on account of insanity. The only remaining issue is whether, in terms of s 22(2)(c), I can be satisfied on the basis of expert evidence that Mr Gerrard-Collier was insane within the meaning of s 23 of the Crimes Act 1961 at the time he killed Ms Crawford.
[19] This is an important matter because it requires the Court, independently of the attitudes taken by the Crown and the defendant, to reach its own conclusion as to whether or not a defendant was insane within the meaning of s 23 of the Crimes Act 1961 at the time of the commission of an offence. It is important that the Court not be seen to be a mere “rubber stamp” for the views expressed by professionals or, indeed, by the Crown and defence. This is an important safeguard because our criminal justice system generally requires crimes such as this to be determined by a jury and not by a
Judge sitting alone. It is equally important, however, that in appropriate cases people who intend to raise a defence of insanity be permitted to have that issue determined in an expedited form before a Judge rather than going through the ordeal of a trial by jury.
Issues
[20] There can be no doubt from what he has told the psychiatrists that Mr Gerrard- Collier committed the acts that led to the death of Ms Crawford. I am therefore required to determine three issues on the balance of probabilities:
(a)Did Mr Gerrard-Collier commit those acts whilst labouring under a disease of the mind?
(b)If so, did that disease of the mind cause him not to understand the nature and quality of his acts; or
(c)Did the disease of the mind result in him not knowing that the act of killing Ms Crawford was morally wrong, having regard to the common or accepted standards of right and wrong?
Was Mr Gerrard-Collier suffering from a disease of the mind at the time he killed Ms Crawford?
[21] The evidence on this issue is compelling. I have the benefit of no fewer than five reports from four different psychiatrists. These are:
(a)Report dated 4 April 2018 from Dr Peter Dean.
(b)Report dated 5 June 2018 from Dr Shailesh Kumar.
(c)Further report dated 11 June 2018 from Dr Dean.
(d)Report dated 2 July 2018 from Dr Kadhem Majeed.
(e)Report dated 5 July 2018 from Dr David Chaplow.
[22] All four psychiatrists agree that Mr Gerrard-Collier has suffered for some considerable time from schizophrenia. This is likely to have its origins in several contributing factors. The first is a motor vehicle accident in 2011 when Mr Gerrard- Collier suffered brain damage after being thrown against the windscreen of a vehicle in which he was travelling. This caused him at the time to suffer intense headaches, mood swings and sleeping difficulties. It is likely to have been a major factor contributing to the schizophrenia from which he now suffers. Allied to the consequences of the brain damage is the fact that, on occasions, Mr Gerrard-Collier has used alcohol to excess. Although he appears to have been an intermittent drinker of alcohol, once he begins drinking alcohol it appears that he tends to keep drinking.
[23] It appears that in or about February 2017, Mr Gerrard-Collier’s mental health began to deteriorate significantly. He was observed behaving oddly, talking to people who were not present. He was paranoid and fearful of unknown persons. He also began hearing voices.
[24] Mr Gerrard-Collier came to the attention of mental health services on several occasions and, on at least two of these, he was placed under treatment. In each case, however, he left the facility before the treatment had either commenced or been completed.
[25] Mr Gerrard-Collier served a sentence of imprisonment in 2017 from which he was released approximately a month before the incident giving rise to the present charges took place. His mother observed that on his release his personality had changed. He was observed by his mother to be “remote”, and appeared to be responding to an unseen force. On the days leading up to the killing he was virtually silent the whole time. In addition, his mother observes that prior to his imprisonment Mr Gerrard-Collier could recognise that he was unwell. On his release, however, he had no insight at all into his mental state.
[26] The reports of all of the psychiatrists are consistent with these observations. I therefore have no doubt that, at the time of the offence, Mr Gerrard-Collier was suffering from schizophrenia. Schizophrenia is well recognised as a disease of the mind in terms of s 23.
Did the disease of the mind cause him not to understand the nature and quality of his actions?
[27] The evidence persuades me that Mr Gerrard-Collier knew he was killing Ms Crawford and that he intended to do so. That is the only realistic inference to be drawn from the fact that he acquired a weapon and then went to Ms Crawford’s address where he single-mindedly set about inflicting deadly wounds. I am therefore satisfied that he understood the nature and quality of the acts he was carrying out.
Did the disease of the mind result in Mr Gerrard-Collier not knowing that the act was morally wrong, having regard to the commonly accepted standards of right and wrong?
[28] The reports provided by the psychiatrists are unanimous on this issue. A convenient summary is contained in the following paragraph of Dr Dean’s report dated 11 June 2018:
Hosea was aware and intended his actions to kill the victim, although he did not perceive it was murder. Therefore he was aware of the nature and quality of his actions at the material time. However, he was overwhelmed with a belief he was marked by the Devil, was receiving commands from the spiritual world, the world was coming to an end and his body was outside of his control. The voices had become increasingly overwhelming, he did not recognise his actions were “murder” and was confused by his experiences. He believed he was going to be tortured in hell for eternity if he did not follow the commands he was given, despite the contradictory nature of these experiences. He killed someone with whom he had a good relationship and there is no logical explanation, other than his response to psychotic experiences, for his actions. It is therefore my opinion Hosea was labouring under a disease of the mind at the material time of the alleged offending to such a degree he was incapable of knowing his actions were morally wrong, having regard to the commonly accepted standards of right and wrong.
[29]To similar effect, Dr Kumar observes:
Furthermore, information provided by Mr Gerrard-Collier, which is corroborated by his temporaneous [sic] psychiatrist records and information provided by his mother, suggests that his disease of the mind would have been of such severity that his ability to know that his act at the material time was morally wrong, with ‘regard to the commonly accepted standards of right and wrong’ would have been impaired. He was experiencing florid auditory and visual hallucinations telling him that the world was coming to an end. He felt so overwhelmed by these voices that he felt the need to arm himself with a machete when he believed people would come out on the streets fighting with each other and he would need to defend himself. He had, on multiple occasions, acted in response to his persecutory delusions by looking for weapons at his mother’s property and by damaging his partner’s children’s
property with an axe, believing that they had been cursed. Few months prior he had also tapped his children on their head, cursing them. Such behaviour indicates Mr Gerrard-Collier had acted in response to his psychotic symptoms, including delusions and hallucinations, on a fairly consistent basis.
Believing that he had been possessed by the devil who had left a mark on his forehead and feeling compelled to act in response to the command that he was hearing to stab the victim, Mr Gerrard-Collier states he stabbed her a number of times, killing her in the process. He states his action of using a knife to kill the victim when he had the machete does not make sense. He contrasts this by stating that he used the machete to kill the sheep when he heard the voices telling him to do so. Based on his report, it appears his capacity to question or disagree with the voices he was hearing would have been seriously impaired as he felt emotionally overwhelmed by his distressing psychotic experiences.
[30] All of the material contained in the psychiatrists’ reports is consistent with observations made by other witnesses and, in particular, Mr Gerrard-Collier’s mother, at around the time of the offending. They persuade me beyond any doubt that at the time of the offending Mr Gerrard-Collier was insane in terms of s 23 of the Crimes Act 1961. I therefore record my finding to that effect under s 20(2) of the Act. It is now necessary for enquiries to be made under s 23 of the Act to determine the most suitable method of dealing with Mr Gerrard-Collier under s 24 or s 25 of the Act.
[31] Mr Gerrard-Collier is currently remanded to the Henry Rongomau Bennett Centre in Hamilton. He will be detained there whilst a report from a psychiatrist is obtained advising the Court as to the appropriate orders to be made under ss 24 and 25 of the Act. As I understand the position, the director of that facility knows of the impending remand and consents to it.
[32] I record that the Crown and defence are also likely to obtain their own psychiatric reports in relation to the issue of disposition.
[33] The proceeding is listed for mention on 31 August 2018 at 9 am to review progress and, if appropriate, to allocate a date for the disposition hearing. Mr Gerrard- Collier is not required to attend the hearing on 31 August.
Lang J
Solicitors:
Pollett Legal Ltd, Tauranga Gowing & Co Ltd, Whakatane
0
0