COURT FILE NO.: CR-23-11

DATE: 2024-01-03

ONTARIO

SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE

BETWEEN:

HIS MAJESTY THE KING

– and –

Bradley House

Defendant

Gabriele Settimi, for the Crown

Beth Bromberg and Kristian Ferreira, for the Defendant

HEARD: October 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 30, November 1, 3, 6, 7, and 10, 2023

THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE M. BORDIN

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

Overview

[1] The tragic events of the evening of February 3, 2022 are the good Samaritan’s nightmare.

[2] At approximately 8:00 p.m., Paul Pender and his family opened the door to their cottage to a stranger in need of help. A few short minutes later, Paul Pender was lying in the snow, 130 meters away, bleeding to death from multiple stab wounds. He died in the falling snow outside a neighbour’s cottage with his partner and neighbours at his side.

[3] Bradley House is charged with second degree murder in the death of Paul Pender. Mr. House concedes the Crown has proven that Mr. House stabbed Paul Pender and caused his death. Indeed, unsolicited, he expressed deep remorse at having done so.

[4] However, Mr. House asserts that he is not criminally responsible (“NCR”) pursuant to s. 16 of the Criminal Code of Canada. In the alternative, he asserts that the Crown has not established beyond a reasonable doubt that he was able to formulate the specific intent to cause bodily harm that he knew was likely to result in Paul Pender’s death that is required for second degree murder. Mr. House does not pursue a defence of extreme intoxication.

[5] The Crown called Ms. Chow, a toxicologist, and Dr. Chaimowitz. Mr. House testified in his defence, called his spouse, Ms. Duby, his friend, Mr. Stevens-Ferreira, and Dr. Gojer. On consent, the reports of Dr. Chaimowitz and Dr. Gojer were filed as exhibits.

[6] Dr. Chaimowitz’s and Dr. Gojer’s qualifications were not challenged. Both are eminently qualified, have lengthy CVs, relevant experience and training, and have testified as experts hundreds of times. Dr. Chaimowitz has, since 2005, been the Head of Service and Academic Lead in the Forensic Psychiatry Program at St. Joseph’s Healthcare Hamilton. Dr. Gojer has for many years served at various hospitals as a forensic psychiatrist and carried on a private practice in psychiatry and forensic psychiatry. Both were accepted as experts in forensic psychiatry.

[7] Both Dr. Chaimowitz and Dr. Gojer agreed that Mr. House was not capable of knowing what he did was morally wrong. Dr. Chaimowitz added that Mr. House was incapable of rational thought at the time of the offence but was of the view that Mr. House was capable of appreciating the nature and quality of his actions. Dr. Gojer opined that Mr. House was not able to appreciate the nature and quality of his actions.

[8] The experts disagree on whether Mr. House was suffering from a mental disorder as defined in the criminal law. Dr. Chaimowitz is of the opinion that Mr. House did not suffer from a mental disorder and that the psychotic episode and the stabbing of Paul Pender was brought about by drug use. The Crown adopts Dr. Chaimowitz’s position.

[9] Dr. Gojer is of the opinion that Mr. House suffered from schizophrenia and a differential diagnosis of schizophrenia spectrum disorder or other psychotic disorder and that the use of drugs on the day in question possibly accentuated preexisting psychotic symptoms.

[10] The process I am to follow is set out in a number of cases: R. v. David (2002), 2002 CanLII 45049 (ON CA), 61 O.R. (3d) 1 (C.A.), at paras. 46-56; R. v. MacKinnon, 2021 ONSC 4763, at paras. 48-49; and R. v. McClenaghan, 2008 ABCA 7, 437 A.R. 247, at para. 148. As there is no dispute that the Crown has proven that Mr. House unlawfully caused Paul Pender’s death, I am next to consider whether Mr. House is not criminally responsible. If I find that Mr. House is criminally responsible, then I am to consider whether the Crown has established the intent necessary for second degree murder.

[11] I begin with a review of the agreed facts and evidence.

Agreed facts, Evidence and factual findings

Events on February 3, 2022 Prior to Mr. House’s Arrival at the Pender Cottage

[12] The Crown and defence tendered a lengthy Agreed Statement of Facts (“Agreed Facts”) which also contained exhibits. Paragraphs 12 through 54 below are taken from the Agreed Facts.

[13] Mr. House was addicted to cocaine and oxycodone, and he regularly used marijuana. On February 3, 2022, he used drugs before and at work as he normally did. It is not known exactly how much cocaine and Percocet Mr. House used on February 3, 2022. He also drank two “Twisted Teas” containing alcohol.

[14] Mr. House had been working on home renovations at a residence at 26 Melville Lane in Selkirk for six months along with his half-brother, Darren Thomas, and “Tommy”. Mr. House did not go to work the week before February 3, 2022.

[15] The owner did not mind that Mr. House did drugs if the work was done. He told police that when Mr. House was using drugs his personality never changed.

[16] Darren Thomas described Mr. House to be acting normally at work on February 3, 2022, except for an incident that happened just before he ran out of the residence. Mr. House was complaining of back and neck pain. Mr. Thomas was not able to crack Mr. House’s back, so Tommy started massaging Mr. House’s back. Mr. House then punched Tommy two or three times and ran out the back door. Mr. House jumped a fence and ran down the road.

[17] After running from his workplace, Mr. House arrived at the Pender cottage. The distance between the two properties is approximately one and a half kilometres along Lakeshore Road, although the route taken by Mr. House is unknown.

Events at the Pender Cottage

[18] There was a significant snowstorm that started prior to Mr. House’s arrival at the Pender cottage which continued throughout the relevant time. It was very cold, visibility was low, and roads were extremely snow covered.

[19] Paul Pender and his partner, Allison Findlay, were staying at their cottage with Allison’s father, Ron Findlay, on February 3, 2022. They were sitting at the dinner table when Mr. House arrived at their door. Mr. House, who was unknown to them, was not wearing a coat. He was very distraught and bleeding from his mouth and head.

[20] Mr. House entered the cottage. He appeared disoriented, distressed, in shock, and in pain and kept saying there was a stick stuck in his head when in fact there was no stick. He said he had fallen down a hill. He kept telling Paul Pender that he had a stick in his head and he wanted to get it out. Paul Pender told him, “There’s no stick in your head.” Mr. House kept screaming to get the stick out.

[21] Mr. Findlay said that Mr. House told them he fell, and he poked a stick in his ear and it broke off, and that Mr. House was hanging onto his head and digging at it.

[22] Allison Findlay said, “You could tell right away something was wrong,” and, “You could tell he was off”. Mr. House’s eyes were darting around, and he was breathing hard. She described him as “fucked”.

[23] At 8:05 p.m., Allison Findlay contacted 9-1-1 initially to get Mr. House some help because of the bleeding. She said he was clearly in distress and in pain, but she did not know if he had been in a car accident, a fight, or what had happened.

[24] Mr. Findlay saw Paul Pender get a pair of tweezers to try and assist Mr. House to remove the non-existent stick from his ear. Allison Findlay heard a scuffle coming from the other room. By the time she looked back, Mr. House had grabbed a large kitchen knife from the counter. He took the kitchen knife to his own head, and he was trying to carve a stick out of his head or digging at his ear with it to remove the non-existent stick that he believed was lodged in his head.

Mr. House Attacks Paul Pender

[25] Mr. House, unprovoked, swung the knife toward Paul Pender as he tried to help him. Paul Pender ran out of the cottage while Mr. House chased after him with the kitchen knife in his hand. Allison Findlay unsuccessfully attempted to strike Mr. House with a broom, but Mr. House pursued Paul Pender. She ran after Mr. House.

[26] Mr. McDougall and Ms. Remillard exited their respective homes in response to Allison Findlay screaming. Ms. Remillard called 9-1-1.

[27] Mr. House chased Paul Pender to 3 Smelser’s Cove Lane. Ms. Lipscey was inside when she heard a bang at her door. She saw someone standing but slumped over and another person behind him walking with a chef’s knife in his right hand. She called 9-1-1.

[28] Ms. Lipscey described Mr. House as having a “distorted” face; “it looked like he had a mask or something on.” She observed what looked like a slow-motion fight with both men rolling and they ended up on the driveway.

[29] When Allison Findlay arrived at 3 Smelser’s Cove Lane, she found Paul Pender lying on top of Mr. House. Paul Pender was motionless, and Mr. House was continuing to stab him with the knife. Allison Findlay and another person rolled him off Mr. House and held Mr. House down.

[30] Allison Findlay was able to wrestle the eight-inch knife away from Mr. House even though he wrapped his legs around her neck. The knife was bent as she wrestled it away from him. She threw the knife into a nearby snowbank. It was later recovered by the police.

[31] Mr. McDougall arrived just after Allison Findlay. He got on top of Mr. House and held him face down on his stomach in the snow with Mr. House’s hands under him. Mr. House was kicking his legs. Ms. Lipscey ran inside to get rope to tie up Mr. House’s legs. She helped Mr. McDougall keep Mr. House secured until the police arrived.

[32] While Mr. House was being held down, he was “mumbling” and had “slurred speech”. Ms. Lipscey could not understand what he was saying. Mr. McDougall recalls Mr. House occasionally saying: “I want to go home; I want to go home” and “I’m hot”. Ms. Remillard made similar observations of Mr. House. Mr. McDougall observed that Mr. House was not making much sense, it was like he did not know where he was or what he was doing, and he was fairly quiet.

[33] Paul Pender was still alive. Allison Findlay attempted to help him by trying to find the injury, keeping pressure on the wounds, keeping him warm, and performing CPR. Ms. Remillard assisted Allison with CPR as directed over the phone by ambulance dispatch. While dispatch was trying to guide the CPR, Mr. House is heard in the background saying “I want to help. I want to help.”

The Police Arrive

[34] The Ontario Provincial Police (“OPP”) were dispatched to the scene at 8:10 p.m. along with emergency personnel. The OPP arrived on the scene at about 8:36 p.m.

[35] When paramedics arrived on the scene, the police were still performing CPR. They continued their efforts to save Paul Pender until they were given termination of resuscitation orders.

[36] Paul Pender died of multiple sharp force injuries described as follows by the post-mortem examination:

a. Stab wound to the right upper arm, penetrating the right axilla and injuring the right axillary artery. This injury would have been rapidly fatal without timely appropriate medical intervention.

b. Incised wound to the left scalp and face. If not treated properly in a timely manner, it could potentially have led to death.

c. Stab wound to the left upper back, perforating the diaphragm and lower lobe of the left lung. If not treated properly in a timely manner, it could potentially have led to death.

d. A superficial stab wound to the right anterior neck.

[37] At 8:41 p.m., the OPP took control of Mr. House from Mr. McDougall who was holding him face down in the snow with his hands underneath him and his legs tied. Mr. House was described initially as unresponsive when he was asked who he was and where the knife was. He felt “stone cold” and very stiff when first approached by the police.

[38] Two officers brought Mr. House to the police cruiser. He continuously dropped to his knees. The two officers had Mr. House by his arms and had to drag him down the laneway.

[39] At 8:47 p.m., Mr. House was assessed medically and was “unintelligible, moaning, slurring, shaking, groaning, and gurgling.” Several times he said, “I love you guys.”

[40] Mr. House was provisionally arrested at 8:54 p.m. pending the medical status of Paul Pender. He was told he would be charged with assault with a weapon or murder. He was provided with the police caution, and when asked if he understood Mr. House replied “yes”. He was then advised that everything was being recorded and asked to indicate the difference between “yes” and “no”. Mr. House was still gurgling, moaning, groaning, and unintelligible.

[41] At 8:55 p.m., the police provided Mr. House his rights to counsel. He replied “yes” when he was asked if he understood. When he was asked if he would like to speak to a lawyer he replied “probably” or “pardon” and then eventually “yes”. When asked if he was hurt, Mr. House indicated his “heart”.

[42] At 9:15 p.m., police removed Mr. House from his position of lying in the back of the police cruiser and brought him to a nearby ambulance for assessment. While he was being removed from the police cruiser, Mr. House was groaning, and he said, “I’m sorry if I came off rude.”

[43] Mr. House walked part way to the ambulance, and then police carried him the rest of the way. On the way to the ambulance, Mr. House said he “had a bad trip”.

[44] He was placed on a seat in the ambulance. Police moved his handcuffs from behind his back to his front. At 9:20 p.m., Mr. House was still gurgling, moaning, generally speaking unintelligibly, and was quite agitated, slumped, and moving around. Mr. House did not maintain a sitting position and slumped partially onto the floor. He was continually moving, which made assessment difficult. Police and ambulance attendants lifted Mr. House from the floor back to the seat two or three times.

[45] At 9:22 p.m., Mr. House was treated by Emergency Medical Services (“EMS”) and was unintelligible and semi-conscious. He identified himself as “Bradley.”

[46] During treatment, at 9:59 p.m., PC Bruinekool heard Mr. House respond to an EMS question relating to drug intake by indicating that he had taken “coke”.

[47] Police and ambulance attendants put Mr. House on a stretcher in the ambulance. As soon as he was moved to the stretcher, he reached his handcuffed hands up to his head and held it. His speech was mostly unintelligible, but he can be heard groaning and saying, “My head is killing me, feels, ohhhh.”

[48] While on the stretcher in the ambulance, Mr. House was moaning, groaning, grimacing, and still moving his arms continually. He repeatedly moved his handcuffed hands to his head and right ear area. At other times, he grimaced and moved his hands in the direction of his head and right ear, though his hands did not reach all the way. At one point, he groaned “my head’.

[49] At 10:06 p.m., the ambulance began transporting Mr. House to the hospital in Hagersville for further medical assessment. At 10:10 p.m., after being read the caution and being asked if he understood, Mr. House initially provided an unintelligible response and then, after it was read again, he stated “yes”. PC Bruinekool read the caution again to be sure Mr. House understood. Mr. House did not speak clearly, so PC Bruinekool asked him to confirm with a thumbs up, which he did. PC Bruinekool noted that at this time he did not believe that Mr. House was in a proper state of mind to understand the caution and rights to counsel.

[50] At 10:15 p.m., when asked about his drug intake, Mr. House indicated that he took Percocet, and when asked how much, he indicated “15” and something unintelligible. Mr. House was still unintelligible, gurgling, struggling to breathe, groaning, and generally unresponsive to questions.

[51] The Haldimand County Paramedic Service Ambulance Call Report for Mr. House indicated in part:

a. Patient stated previous use of cocaine and had snorted substance that day around 7 p.m.

b. Patient stated that he had past of using cocaine for four years.

c. Patient was alert to person and place but not time.

d. Patient appeared cold/wet to touch from snow, extremities were purple. No obvious hemorrhaging.

e. Patient noted to be extremely altered and EMS assessing him had difficulty understanding patient while attempting to confirm story multiple times throughout assessment.

Mr. House Taken to Hospital

[52] Mr. House arrived by ambulance at the hospital in Hagersville at 10:28 p.m. A search found him in possession of a substance containing oxycodone and acetaminophen.

[53] At 10:58 p.m., Dr. Cloete, who was examining Mr. House, advised PC Armstrong that Mr. House had “bitten off a chunk of his tongue”. PC Armstrong observed that Mr. House was “more coherent now” and had earlier told staff that he had “coke and percs” in his system.

[54] At 11:04 p.m., Mr. House indicated he wanted to tell police what happened. His Charter rights and cautions were then reread to him and explained at great length and in simple terms.

[55] At 11:13 p.m., Dr. Cloete was very concerned about the acidity of Mr. House’s blood and told police that he wanted to bring his body temperature up. Mr. House was treated for hypothermia. At 3:22 a.m., Dr. Cloete was satisfied with Mr. House’s recovery and discharged him with a prescription of antibiotics for his cuts and abrasions.

Toxicology Evidence

[56] A toxicology screen was completed at the hospital, and it confirmed that there was cocaine, marijuana, and opioids in Mr. House’s blood. No other substance was flagged by the screen. A vial of Mr. House’s blood was sealed, stored, and later sent to the Centre of Forensic Sciences. No evidence was led as to the precise time the sample was taken.

[57] Betty Chow was qualified as an expert in the absorption, distribution and elimination of alcohol, drugs and poisons, the effects of alcohol, drugs and poisons on the human body, and the analysis of alcohol, drugs and poisons in biological samples. Her qualifications were not challenged. Ms. Chow testified as to the substances found in Mr. House’s blood. The toxicology tests Ms. Chow reported on tested for hundreds of substances.

[58] Used recreationally or therapeutically, oxycodone can have depressant effects resulting in reduced consciousness and motor coordination. The extent of the effects depends on the route of administration and the tolerance of the individual to the drug. Oxycodone was detected in Mr. House’s blood within a therapeutic range. It typically takes a day or more to eliminate the drug from the blood, longer if more is taken and if the individual has a dependency and takes the drug regularly. The amount consumed by Mr. House on February 3, 2022 cannot be determined from the concentration of oxycodone in his blood.

[59] Cocaine can be detected in blood. Cocaine is expected to be undetectable in the blood six to nine hours after use if the individual did not have any existing cocaine in the blood. If the individual was a chronic user, they could have detectible amounts of cocaine 24 hours after the last known use. Cocaine was not detected in Mr. House’s blood. Cocaine is unstable and breaks down. A breakdown product of cocaine is benzoylecgonine, which was found in Mr. House’s blood. Ms. Chow was unable to say when, how much, or how cocaine was consumed by Mr. House. However, based on the high benzoylecgonine concentration, Ms. Chow could say that Mr. House had either consumed a large quantity at once or repeatedly used smaller quantities over time. Because benzoylecgonine takes some time to be eliminated, it could have been over a period of days.

[60] THC and Carboxy THC, a substance produced from the breakdown of THC, were detected in Mr. House’s blood. THC is long-lasting and can be stored in fatty tissues of the body, particularly in chronic users. For a chronic user of marijuana, THC can be detected in the blood for four or five days since last use. Ms. Chow could not say when Mr. House used marijuana or how much he used.

The Body Cam Video

[61] The Crown tendered over two hours of body cam video as part of the Agreed Facts, some of which I have summarized. The parties agreed that utterances made by Mr. House included in the Agreed Facts are admissible for the purpose of illustrating Mr. House’s mental condition at the time and not for the purpose of proving the truth of the utterances.

[62] I set out only some of what Mr. House said and did on the body cam video that can be made out. I do not set out the many times that Mr. House was unresponsive or incoherent in answering questions from the police.

a. At 20:40:05, it appears that Mr. House says “please help me” when the police first arrive and he is being held face down in the snow with his legs tied.

b. At 20:43:23, it is possible Mr. House responds to the question asked some 15 seconds earlier (what is your name?), by saying “Bradley House”. Seconds later, it appears he responds to the question “do you have any weapons on you?” by saying “no”.

c. At 20:43:58, it sounds like Mr. House says, “I love you all” and “I love you guys” and at 20:44:22, “I love everybody in this world.”

d. At 20:44:28, Mr. House says, “I had a bad trip”, the officer says, “Pardon me?” and Mr. House says, “I had a bad trip” and seconds later repeats, “I love you guys.”

e. Up until 20:45:00, Mr. House is lying face down in the snow.

f. At 20:50:23, while he is seated in the cruiser, Mr. House says, “Simon says.”

g. At 20:55:37, after being read the right to counsel, Mr. House appears to say “yes I did” when asked if he understood, but then immediately asks for a drink of water.

h. At 21:11:27, Mr. House responds to a question about his name by saying “Bradley”.

i. At 21:17:33, it sounds like Mr. House says, “you guys are the best” and then perhaps “…for helping (or having) me.”

j. In the ambulance at 21:22:30, it takes Mr. House 15 seconds to answer the question “what is your name” and say the words “my name is Bradley.” Several times in the ambulance he asks for a drink.

k. At 21:58:30 through 22:01:35, Mr. House struggles to tell the paramedic what drugs he took. It sounds as though he tells the paramedic that he took “one and a half” of cocaine. Much of what he says is difficult to understand.

l. At 22:02:45, he answers the paramedic’s question about when he took coke by saying “when I wake up”.

m. At 22:27:56, the paramedic asks Mr. House whether he has any allergies to medications and 15 seconds later Mr. House struggles to say “Tylenol”.

n. In the hospital at 22:37:10, Mr. House is able to advise nurses of his month and year of birth and at 22:38:18 he tells them that he is on “Percs and cocaine”. By this time, he has almost stopped moaning.

o. In a hospital bed under a blanket by 22:51:19, Mr. House begins to settle and is quiet.

p. From about 23:04:20, Mr. House is more coherent and intelligible and is engaging the officers in limited conversation, although whether he comprehends all of what the officers tell him is not clear.

q. At 23:08:38, Mr. House says he has a lawyer that he deals with and wants to talk to him. He asks, “Is it 11 o’clock right now?”

r. At 23:11:28, Mr. House tells the officers he is not a bad person, and he will answer their questions as well as he can.

s. At 23:16:20, Mr. House struggles with providing information as to the location of his family.

t. At 23:27:48, Mr. House says something to the nurse as she is looking behind his right ear and the nurse asks, “What is it?” Mr. House says, “It’s a chip,” and the nurse asks, “From what?”. Mr. House responds, “I have no fucking idea,” and the nurse looks in his ear.

u. At 23:31:50, the doctor speaks to Mr. House about the effects of exposure to the cold. The doctor then looks at Mr. House’s ear and asks, “What hit you in the ear here?” Mr. House’s answer is somewhat difficult to make out in its entirety but in part he says, “I felt something … I was trying to get it out.” The doctor says, “So you pushed twigs into your ear,” and Mr. House says, “Yeah, right here … I have no idea what the fuck is going on.”

v. At 23:33:04, Mr. House asks if he can get a hold of his lawyer, he provides the name of his lawyer in Binbrook.

w. By 03:30:00 on February 4, Mr. House is able to answer questions about his address and next of kin and his cell phone, but has difficulty remembering his phone number, and asks if he can call his lawyer.

x. At 03:39:39, Mr. House spontaneously asks the police officers, “What exactly happened?”

[63] From the time the police arrive on the scene at approximately 8:40 p.m. until he is in the hospital at approximately 10:38 p.m., when Mr. House speaks, much of what he says comes out as a moan or a groan or is mostly incomprehensible. For much of this time, he has minimal control over his body movements. At times, he seems to be able to respond to the simple questions the police are asking and the things they are doing. At times, his responses of “yes” or “no” are delayed after the questions are posed. Some of his responses appear nonsensical and disconnected from the circumstances he is in. At other times, he seems unable to respond to simple questions or it takes him a long time to respond to the questions.

[64] It is not at all clear that Mr. House understood the charges against him and the right to counsel when put to him in the ambulance at approximately 22:10 – 22:15 or prior to that time. In the hospital, he appears to understand his right to counsel. During the entire body cam video footage, Mr. House appears to have no comprehension of having stabbed Paul Pender. Although he is told that he is charged with murder and he appears to understand the words, it is difficult to say whether Mr. House truly understood what had happened.

Mr. House’s Video Statement to the Police

[65] The defence tendered Mr. House’s February 4, 2022 videotaped statement. The statement was made proximate in time to the events. Mr. House’s statements in the video are admissible as evidence of his physical, mental or emotional state: R. v. Bagherzadeh, 2023 ONCA 706, at para. 26. However, they are not admissible for the truth of their contents or as independent verification of his in-court testimony: Bagherzadeh, paras. 25-27.

[66] An accused’s “preposterous statements” of a delusion can be considered original evidence relevant to the issue of mental disorder but are not proof of any fact asserted in them. Statements from an accused about a previous delusion or that he suffered from a delusion are hearsay assertions not admissible to prove the fact asserted: R. v. Worrie, 2022 ONCA 471, 415 C.C.C. (3d) 45, at para. 152; R. v. Dobson, 2015 ONSC 2865, 2015 CarswellOnt 12656.

[67] Because Mr. House testified, spontaneous exculpatory statements made by him upon or shortly after arrest may be admitted for the purpose of showing his reaction when first confronted with the accusation. The statements are not evidence of the truth of what was said but are evidence of Mr. House’s reaction, which is relevant to his credibility and as circumstantial evidence that may have a bearing on guilt or innocence: R. v. Edgar, 2010 ONCA 529, 101 O.R. (3d) 161, at para. 72.

[68] The video recorded interview of Mr. House began at 6:35 a.m. on February 4, 2022 and ended at 7:36 a.m.

[69] In my view, with one possible exception, there are no statements of a “preposterous nature” in the video statement. At approximately the 19:30 mark of the video statement, Mr. House is asked why he is in the police interview room and he responds:

I I I remember just sanding sanding and this is like this is about two hours after I did my drugs there and then a ringing started happening in my ear and from there I I feel like I went fucking crazy cause my head was fucking ringing my my brain was throbbing and I was drooling like nonstop I couldn’t get this pain or my ringing out of my ear so I started fucking thrashing and come to find out that there’s a fucking camera or something in my goddam ear and I I tried to get it out with a twig snapped the twig in my ear and kept trying to get out the twigs and then from there I don’t remember from there.

[70] The statement “I … come to find out that there’s a fucking camera or something in my goddam ear” is a “preposterous statement” and is admissible as original evidence relevant to whether Mr. House suffers from a mental disorder.

[71] The video statement also captures Mr. House’s response to the information that he is charged with second degree murder. Very early in the interview he is asked if he knows why he is there. He says no. He is then asked if the other officers told him why he was there and responds that “they said something about first degree murder.” The interviewing officer corrects him and says that he is going to be charged with second degree murder. Mr. House simply responds “okay,” and they continue their discussion. In cross-examination, Mr. House acknowledged that at this point he knew he was being charged with second degree murder.

[72] At approximately the 26:20 mark of the video, Mr. House is told that someone died and that is why he is charged with second degree murder. It is the first time he is told that someone has died. This time Mr. House appears visibly upset and says “no” when asked if he realized he was charged with second degree murder. Shortly thereafter, he is asked about the scratches and cuts on his arms and he says that he thought he took a vehicle or something.

[73] At the 33:45 mark of the video, Mr. House is left alone in the room. At approximately 35:45, he is heard saying to himself: “How the fuck could I have done that … car accident … hit a tree ... is someone ….”

[74] At approximately the 38:40 mark of the video, after the officer returns, Mr. House tells the interviewing officer he is really confused and is thinking about how this could have happened and why it happened. At approximately the 49-minute mark of the video, Mr. House is again told that “a guy died” and he responds, “Oh man and that’s on me.” The officer then says, “The guy tried to help you,” and Mr. House responds, “Oh fuck.”

[75] Finally, a little over an hour into the video, Mr. House is asked about the cuts on his arms. He responds that the only thing he could think of is “a car accident you said I hurt I kill I killed a guy all I could think about was I hit him with a car or something and I crashed into a tree or something like that.”

[76] Mr. House’s reaction, taken together with the Agreed Facts and body cam video evidence demonstrates that Mr. House was confused as to the nature of the events that gave rise to the charge against him and supports a conclusion that he did not recall his attack on Paul Pender. It is consistent with Dr. Chaimowitz’s conclusion that Mr. House had no memory of what happened.

Mr. House’s Background

[77] Mr. House is a 33-year-old Indigenous man. He was born in July 1990. He lived his life in Hamilton except for a few years from approximately 2012 until approximately 2016 when he lived on the Six Nations Reserve.

[78] Mr. House is one of many children. He was raised by his mother. His home was described as chaotic, a scene of adult extended family members drinking, partying, and fighting. His mother drank all the time, was often absent, and there was a lack of parenting and supervision. The fridge was often empty. They moved a lot when he was a child. Mr. House testified that he was physically and sexually abused as a young boy. He saw his father twice, once when he was 20 and then when he was 24 when his father was in the morgue.

[79] As a child and during his high school years, Mr. House spent a great deal of time with his best friend, Lino Stevens-Ferreira, in the evenings and on weekends. Much of that time was spent at the house of Mr. Stevens-Ferreira’s mother, who would often provide meals to Mr. House. The boys would also frequent the Comic Connection in Hamilton beginning when Mr. House was about 11. They would walk approximately 60 to 90 minutes from their homes to the Comic Connection.

[80] Mr. House’s family suffered many tragedies. His grandparents were residential school survivors. One of Mr. House’s cousins with whom he was close died in a car accident when Mr. House was 18. His younger brother Richie died when Mr. House was 20 or 21. His younger brother Willard died in 2020 when Mr. House was 30. Mr. House was close with both of his brothers. He was blamed for Willard’s death, and he blamed himself for both his brothers’ deaths. When he was 31, another of his younger brothers was stabbed and is wheelchair bound as a result. Around the same time, another one of Mr. House’s cousins died by fire and another cousin by overdose.

[81] Mr. House graduated from high school, although the evidence suggests he had learning issues and it may not have been easy for him to do so.

[82] By the time he was about 21 years old, Mr. House had met Stephanie Duby. He maintained an 11-year relationship with her. They have five children together. Their first child was born in August 2012, and they began to live together in August 2013. They had four more children in 2014, 2016, 2017 and 2019. They both became addicted to cocaine and Percocet and at times dealt drugs to bring in money for drugs and to provide for the children.

[83] Mr. House volunteered at the Women’s Health Centre for a couple of summers, he paid the rent, and had no criminal record. He worked at various jobs, sometimes having steady employment for periods of time and sometimes working part-time. Ms. Duby described him as a hard worker. Mr. House owed money to his dealer and in the year or so before February 3, 2022, he did construction and moving work and sold drugs for his dealer to work off the debt and in exchange for drugs and cash.

The Credibility and Reliability of Mr. House and the Lay Witnesses

[84] Mr. House was calm and composed throughout his testimony. He answered questions in a forthright manner. Overall, Mr. House was open, frank, and honest. He provided information that did not put him in a good light.

[85] At trial, Mr. House, of his own accord indicated he wished to say something while in the witness box. It was suggested he should answer the questions from his counsel. In response to questions from his counsel, he reiterated that he had no idea what happened on February 3, 2022 and does not recall what happened. He said he was extremely sorry to the family that he hurt, and to his own family.

[86] Mr. House readily acknowledged that he was often guessing as to when or what year things occurred. He was suggestible. He was often asked leading questions which made it difficult at times to assess whether he was simply providing an affirmative response to suggestions made to him. In examination in-chief, he sometimes hesitated in answering questions. He would need to be prompted with possible answers in the form of the follow-up questions posed by his counsel. In cross-examination, he was able to understand Crown counsel’s fast-paced and sometimes multipart questions and answer without hesitation.

[87] There was some indication in Dr. Chaimowitz’s report that one test administered to determine whether Mr. House was malingering showed that some of Mr. House’s reported symptoms may have been exaggerated. However, Dr. Chaimowitz testified that there was no indication that Mr. House was malingering symptoms or that he was lying about what he was telling Dr. Chaimowitz’s team.

[88] In some ways, Mr. House’s evidence was understated. He was a credible witness; however, his evidence was at times unreliable and inconsistent, particularly with respect to when events occurred and his drug use over the years. He acknowledged being a poor historian.

[89] Mr. Stevens-Ferreira was sometimes evasive and combative in cross-examination despite his calm and polite demeanor. On occasion, he would provide explanations which were not responsive to the questions. At times, Mr. Stevens-Ferreira was speculating about what Mr. House was experiencing and was retroactively reconstructing events and adding detail.

[90] However, Mr. Stevens-Ferreira’s evidence did not always align with Mr. House’s evidence. It could have been more consistent with Mr. House’s evidence if he was fabricating evidence to support Mr. House’s defence. For example, Mr. Stevens-Ferreira could have testified that he saw Mr. House dealing with spirits in high school, before drug use, or that Mr. House told him about a camera in his ear, but he did not. His evidence of the symptoms he observed Mr. House experiencing were credible and reliable although at times he seemed to enhance and expand the symptom details and frequency.

[91] At times, Ms. Duby was also speculating about what Mr. House was thinking or why he was doing things. There are issues with her credibility and reliability which I address below. At times, it appeared she was elaborating to support Mr. House’s defence as much as possible. Her evidence was not particularly reliable or credible when it came to Mr. House’s drug use and symptoms. At other times, her evidence was consistent, for example regarding when she started using drugs. She readily admitted things which put her in a bad light, such as using drugs when she had five children at home as well as their drug debt owed to a dealer.

[92] I raised with the parties whether I could rely on any inconsistent statements made by the defence witnesses and recorded in the expert reports which were not put to the witnesses to assess their credibility. The parties did not respond to this issue. In my view, it would not be appropriate to use any inconsistent statements in that manner as the witnesses were not confronted with possible inconsistencies and did not have an opportunity to respond to them, contextualize them, or explain their prior statements. As a result, to the extent that there are statements in the expert reports which may be inconsistent with the evidence of the witnesses, which were not put to the witnesses, they go to the weight of the experts’ evidence, but not to the credibility of the witnesses.

Evidence of Mr. House and the Lay Witnesses Regarding Mr. House’s Symptoms

Evidence Concerning Drug and Alcohol Use

[93] Mr. Stevens-Ferreira testified that he and Mr. House spent a lot of time together outside of school. He said that Mr. House did not drink, smoke marijuana, or use drugs when they were in high school.

[94] Mr. House said he began drinking when he was 19 and was drinking heavily every weekend by the time he was 20. Mr. Stevens-Ferreira gave similar evidence. Mr. House also said he may have had alcohol with his cousin a couple of times before his cousin died when Mr. House was 18. Ms. Duby did not know how much Mr. House was drinking when they first met. Mr. House said his heavy drinking went on for about two years until he had his first child.

[95] Mr. House said he tried marijuana a few times when he was 17 and he began smoking marijuana regularly when he was 21. He never stopped using marijuana. Mr. Stevens-Ferreira gave similar but not identical evidence. Ms. Duby confirmed that when she first met Mr. House, he was smoking marijuana and he continued to do so during the entire time they were together. She does not really know how much he smoked because he was not always with her.

[96] Mr. Stevens-Ferreira’s information about Mr. House’s drug use after Mr. House was 18 or 19 was not reliable partly because there were periods of time where they did not see each other very much. Mr. Stevens-Ferreira cannot say with any degree of certainty the quantity of drugs Mr. House consumed since the end of high school. He was aware that Mr. House was using cocaine and Percocet. Mr. House first told him this after November 2015.

[97] Mr. House said he first used Percocet after he had been hit by a car in 2008 when he was 18. He said he used approximately five Percocet pills over a period of a few weeks. He started using Percocet to get high in 2015, when he was 25. Before that, he used it occasionally. Ms. Duby said that she and Mr. House began using Percocet together in late 2014 when Mr. House was 24. She believed it was Mr. House’s first time using Percocet.

[98] Mr. House said he began using cocaine right after his brother Richie died. In cross-examination, he said he started using cocaine when he was 19. He used it occasionally at that time and at the time his first child was born when he was 21. He said he was consuming about 1.7 grams of cocaine one or two times a week between 21 and 23 years of age. At another point in his evidence, Mr. House said he started using cocaine when he was 23 or 24. Cocaine became a real problem, an addiction, when he was 25 or 26 or perhaps 27 as all three answers were given. Before that, he was binging with friends about four times a year on the equivalent of seven grams of cocaine. After 27, he began using every other day.

[99] Mr. House gave conflicting evidence about whether his use of opiates became problematic before his use of cocaine. He admitted to lying to Ms. Duby about the quantity of drugs he was taking.

[100] Ms. Duby said that she and Mr. House began using cocaine together a few times in 2015 when Mr. House was 25. She does not know if Mr. House used cocaine without her. They used cocaine and Percocet almost daily from about 2017 onward.

[101] Mr. House conceded using oxycodone, hydrocodone, Dilaudid, methamphetamine, psilocybin, and purple (a mix of codeine, cough syrup and soda) on at least a few occasions. He regularly took ecstasy and MDMA for a summer when he was about 22. He recalls overdosing on oxycodone in 2020. Mr. Stevens-Ferreira was not aware of this overdose. He was aware of some but not all the different drugs that Mr. House tried.

[102] In December 2018 or January 2019, Mr. Stevens-Ferreira intervened and helped Mr. House to stop using cocaine and Percocet by slowly reducing intake and substituting the drugs with cannabis. It took a couple of months for Mr. House to stop using cocaine and Percocet. He did not use those drugs for approximately 10 months. Ms. Duby testified she also abstained from using cocaine and Percocet during the same time. Both Mr. House and Ms. Duby relapsed in late 2019. Mr. House began using cocaine and Percocet heavily when his brother Willard died in June 2020.

[103] Mr. House said he used drugs every day beginning about a year before February 3, 2022. He would use as much as he could afford.

[104] Mr. House was working off a drug debt with his dealer. He said the routine was that he was given 1.5 grams of cocaine a day. His dealer would provide him with half a gram of cocaine and a couple of Percocets usually around noon. Mr. House would consume the cocaine and one Percocet. He would keep the other Percocet. Sometimes he would have already taken Percocet before that from his own supply. Mr. House did not say he shared the cocaine and Percocet with Ms. Duby. Ms. Duby said they shared the cocaine. She said sometimes they would not get Percocet. Mr. House did not say that.

[105] Mr. House would next consume drugs when he arrived at the job site where he would be given about half a gram of cocaine. He would consume half of it and then the rest at the first break. He would be given another half a gram when it was time to leave.

[106] Mr. Stevens-Ferreira testified that Mr. House’s supply of drugs was restricted by his dealer in the months before February 3, 2022, but he did not know the details. Ms. Duby understood that Mr. House had an agreement with his dealer to be paid in drugs and in cash. Ms. Duby also testified that Mr. House’s dealer was limiting the drugs available to Mr. House but she did not know the quantity supplied by the dealer each day and could not say whether Mr. House was using the same or a different quantity of drugs because he was working a lot and she does not know what he was receiving at work.

[107] Mr. House did not testify that his drug use arose because he was trying to cope with delusions, visions, headaches, ringing in his ear, or other symptoms.

Hearing Voices

[108] Mr. House said nothing in his examination in-chief about hearing voices before February 3, 2022. He testified that the only voice he would hear was the voice of his deceased brother Willard after Willard died. He testified that Willard would speak to him by giving him “Simon says” commands. Mr. House testified that prior to February 3, 2022, he did not hear voices telling him to harm anyone. He acknowledged he did not hear voices on February 3, 2022 telling him to do what he did.

[109] Mr. House confirmed that even if the voices told him to harm someone, he could realize what he should and should not do and when facing delusions or visions and voices he could still tell what is right and what is wrong. He was able to resist a command while in jail to go and fight someone in the shower.

[110] In his report, Dr. Gojer sets out what Mr. House told him about hearing voices including:

a. Hearing voices the morning of February 3, 2022;

b. Hearing voices when he was not using drugs in 2019;

c. Prior to his arrest, he had tried to slit his throat because of the voices;

d. He used headphones to block out the voices; and

e. He heard voices of older males talking to him in a language that sounded like English being said backwards.

[111] Mr. House gave no such evidence at trial. As noted, this information is not used to assess Mr. House’s credibility, but it affects the weight to be given to the expert evidence.

Seeing Spirits

[112] Mr. House said he first began seeing what he called spirits when he was eight or nine years old. He saw shadows in his window, at his door, at the foot of his bed. His mother told him they were ancestors, or that he was seeing them because he was bad or not doing the right things in life. The spirits frightened him. He believed they were real. Mr. House said that on one occasion, his mother arranged for an Indigenous “speaker” to come to the house to cleanse the house. Mr. House was present. He was about 13 years old. He said there was never a time that he did not see spirits. The spirits would come and go. He also began to command the spirits to leave. This occurred before he engaged in any drug use. It continued when he began using drugs. He felt like it got worse over time and increased in the three months before February 3, 2022.

[113] Mr. Stevens-Ferreira first became aware of Mr. House seeing spirits shortly after Mr. House’s first child was born when Mr. House was about 21. He saw Mr. House kick a spirit out of the house on the reservation. Mr. Stevens-Ferreira witnessed Mr. House doing this over the years after that time.

[114] Ms. Duby observed Mr. House yell at spirits and tell them to get out of the house for many years, since at least 2013. It happened throughout their time together, including in 2019. At first it was not very often, but then it increased to a few times a month.

[115] Mr. House said he continued to see and kick spirits out when he was off cocaine and Percocet in 2019. Mr. Stevens-Ferreira testified that Mr. House continued to see spirits during that time and continued to hear things in the upstairs of the house.

[116] Mr. House said that the anti-psychotic medications have reduced his visions of spirits, but they continue.

Being Followed and Hearing Things

[117] Mr. House testified that on occasion when walking with Mr. Stevens-Ferreira to Comic Connection as boys he believed he was being followed. The first time was before high school, but it happened when he was in high school as well. Mr. Stevens-Ferreira recalled such instances beginning around the time Mr. House would have been about 13 years old. Mr. House felt like it got worse over time. It continued when he was using drugs.

[118] Mr. Stevens-Ferreira recalled times when they were young that Mr. House would say there is something outside the window and nothing was there. Mr. House would also check out the window repeatedly. Mr. Stevens-Ferreira recalled one particular incident quite vividly. This persisted throughout their friendship.

[119] Mr. House said he began to associate the colour blue with being followed. He gave evidence that he also had concerns about the colour red. In cross-examination, he acknowledged that his cell phone was red and that on the night in question, he was in the hospital surrounded by things which were blue.

[120] Ms. Duby said Mr. House thought people were following him for years. She knew he was afraid of the colour blue but never paid any mind to it. She did not know about any concerns he had with the colour red.

[121] Mr. House said that he would hear things in the house. Mr. Stevens-Ferreira recalls times when Mr. House would tell him he had heard things upstairs, like a door closing and there was no one there. Mr. House spoke to him about his belief that people were sneaking into his house.

[122] Ms. Duby testified that when they were first together, she noted that Mr. House would hear people around the house when no one was there and was constantly checking out the windows to see if someone was there. He would hear people talking or walking around. This occurred in all the houses they lived in and throughout their time together, including 2019.

[123] Mr. House believed that there were people in his attic; he thought they came from his neighbour’s side of the house. Mr. Stevens-Ferreira said Mr. House would tell him he thought there was someone in his attic. He said this was in 2019.

[124] Ms. Duby said that Mr. House thought people were coming into their home through the attic crawl spaces. She said this was after 2019. At another point in her evidence in-chief, she said it occurred through 2019.

Cameras and Ringing in the Ear

[125] Mr. House testified that when he was a teenager, he began having concerns about cell phones or cameras. He did not like or trust them. He felt scared of them when he was around them.

[126] Ms. Duby testified that Mr. House thought people were trying to listen to him and that people were putting cameras in his house before 2019. She said it began in 2016. Over time it became worse. This belief persisted in 2019 as well. Ms. Duby said that in 2019, when Mr. House was abstaining from cocaine and Percocet, he accused her several times of helping people listen or telling people where they could put cameras in the house and on one occasion pushed her into the wall because he thought she was talking to someone upstairs, but no one was upstairs with her.

[127] During the three months before February 3, 2022, Mr. House said that he felt like there was a camera in his ear listening to him. He said he also felt this way in 2019 when he was not consuming cocaine and Percocet. This was corroborated by Ms. Duby. He said he tried to remove it with a Q-tip, but nothing else.

[128] Mr. House said he had pain in his head behind his right ear, migraines, and ringing in his ear all the time. He thought Ms. Duby had put a camera in his ear. He did not usually get the headaches and ringing in his ear at the same time. He had issues with his wisdom teeth but did not see a dentist. He told Ms. Duby a couple of times that his wisdom teeth were causing headaches.

[129] Ms. Duby said that Mr. House was complaining about his right ear beginning at least in 2016. He would tell her that there was a device or a camera recording and listening to him. He would insert things into his ear to take it out. He also reported to her issues with pain or discomfort behind his right ear for several years. Ms. Duby said Mr. House had headaches for years. They occurred almost every day. Sometimes they were bad enough for him to stay in bed.

[130] Ms. Duby was aware that Mr. House experienced ringing in his ear because he talked about it for years. At times it made him panicky. Ms. Duby said she told Mr. House to see a doctor about these issues several times.

[131] Mr. Stevens-Ferreira acknowledged that in the year or so before February 3, 2022 he was not seeing Mr. House as frequently. Mr. Stevens-Ferreira was not often at Mr. House’s residence in the three months before Paul Pender was killed.

[132] Mr. Stevens-Ferreira testified that in the three months leading up to February 3, 2022, something was wrong with Mr. House. He would pick at the back right side of his head behind his ear and would squeeze and tell Mr. Stevens-Ferreira there was something there. Mr. Stevens-Ferreira checked multiple times and there was nothing there. Mr. Stevens-Ferreira said he first noticed this behaviour after Willard died and about eight months before Mr. House’s arrest and it continued until February 3, 2022. He said it occurred regularly. Mr. Stevens-Ferreira testified that Mr. House never told him what was in his ear, only that he thought there was something stuck in it. Mr. House never spoke to him about ringing in his ear or about concerns about cameras.

[133] Mr. Stevens-Ferreira said that in the months before February 3, 2022, when Mr. House visited, he would on occasion stare off into space or at the wall for 45 minutes and mumble to himself. Later, Mr. Stevens-Ferreira said it would go on for a couple of hours. Mr. House seemed confused and lost. This occurred a “handful of times” which Mr. Stevens-Ferreira said was between 5 and 15 times. At other times, he seemed himself. Later in his evidence, Mr. Stevens-Ferreira’s answers suggested this type of episode may have only occurred once. He said, “I’ve never seen Bradley like that other than at my house the months before I – I’ve seen him do a lot of drugs. I, to this day I still have no explanation for how he was that day at my house.” Mr. Stevens-Ferreira also said that in the months leading up to February 3, 2022 Mr. House could not play and finish a card game that they had played since they were teenagers.

[134] Mr. House said he thought there were cameras in his outlets and smoke detectors. In the months leading up to February 3, 2022, Mr. House said his feeling about cameras in his house and head got worse, as did the headaches and ringing in his ear.

[135] Ms. Duby said that at some unspecified point in time Mr. House removed all the smoke detectors because he thought there were cameras in them. She said he also removed wall sockets because he thought there were devices in them. She said this occurred at the end of 2018.

Treatment for Drugs or Delusions

[136] Mr. House never sought treatment for the ringing in his ear, the headaches, or for his addictions. Mr. Stevens-Ferreira never suggested that Mr. House seek help for his mental health.

Suicide Attempts

[137] Mr. House was not asked about and gave no evidence of suicide attempts.

[138] Ms. Duby testified about three suicide attempts by Mr. House in the two months before February 3, 2022. The first and “worst one” occurred just before Christmas in December 2021. Ms. Duby said she found Mr. House upstairs with a knife to his throat saying he could end it all. She said a similar thing occurred in the entrance to their home at the beginning of January 2022. She later said it happened between January 20 and 25. He had a kitchen knife and was holding it over his wrist saying he could end it all. Ms. Duby said it happened a third time upstairs between January 20 and 25, 2022.

[139] Ms. Duby conceded that she had never told the police or the doctors that Mr. House threatened suicide with a kitchen knife three times. She said it was because she has had mental problems and does not have a lot of trust for the police.

Intimate Partner Violence

[140] Mr. House testified that nothing like what happened on February 3, 2022 had ever happened to him before. He recalled having conversations with Ms. Duby about saying mean things to her but not remembering them. He thinks that was because of the drugs.

[141] He said he recalled a couple of occasions where he was violent with Ms. Duby when he had taken drugs and he would have episodes where he would tune out and then when he would come out of it and Ms. Duby would be sad and upset. However, no further particulars of these events were sought or provided by Mr. House.

[142] Ms. Duby told much more detailed versions of what she said occurred.

[143] Ms. Duby said that in the months before February 3, 2022, on one occasion while she was sleeping, Mr. House came to the bedroom saying that she was helping “them” and letting “them” put cameras in the house and he hit her leg with a two-by-four. She said his eyes were blank, emotionless, like he was not there. Mr. House left for a walk and when he came back, he seemed more like himself and had no recollection of what had occurred. Mr. House cried and apologized.

[144] Ms. Duby said there was another time something similar happened. Mr. House ran into their residence and pinned her to the ground, choked her, and accused her of helping “them” put cameras in the house. She said his face was blank and he had no soul in his eyes, and he was gone. She said he left and when he came back Mr. House wanted to know what was wrong. Ms. Duby believes Mr. House did not know what he had done. When she told him he had choked her, he cried and apologized.

[145] Ms. Duby testified that these two events occurred the week before February 3, 2022 when Mr. House stayed home.

[146] In Ms. Duby’s view, these incidents were not related to drug use, but she also acknowledged that she does not know if Mr. House had used drugs before the choking incident. She also said that there were no drugs in the house. This is contrary to Mr. House’s evidence of his drug use which includes the use of drugs upon waking and the use of drugs he had in his possession from the day before.

[147] Ms. Duby agreed she only mentioned the two-by-four incident and the choking incident to Dr. Gojer, although the police interviewed her twice in February 2022 – at her house on February 6, 2022 and in the police cruiser on February 17, 2022.

[148] The police asked Ms. Duby on February 6 if she knew if Mr. House had any medical issues and issues with drugs and alcohol. She was confronted with her statement to police in response that Mr. House smoked weed. She did not adopt the answer but explained that she was just trying to process that Mr. House was not there and she was on her own with five children. She denied that she lied just because she did not mention that Mr. House consumed more than just marijuana.

[149] Ms. Duby agreed that in terms of Mr. House’s medical issues, she told the police at her first interview only about Mr. House’s knees and that he had headaches which come and go which she associated with his wisdom teeth which started bothering him about a year earlier. She said she did not say anything else to the police about Mr. House’s issues because she did not trust the police. She did not say anything about visions or delusions. It was put to her that she did not say anything about intimate partner violence to the police at the first interview to which she said, “How do you want to paint a picture of your best friend when you know that is not the person he is?” When it was put to her that she did not say anything about cameras or Mr. House’s episodes, she said it was because she did not know who the police were and because she had a lot of distrust for the police. Ms. Duby also said she did not mention Mr. House was having any type of episodes because she was not asked.

[150] By the time of the second police interview, Ms. Duby had spoken with Mr. House’s mother, with Mr. Stevens-Ferreira, and with Mr. House’s lawyer. Ms. Duby told the police about Mr. House’s paranoia, memory lapses, voices in the attic, complaints about cameras and blackouts. When it was pointed out to Ms. Duby that she told the police that Mr. House had never been physically violent, even in the episodes, she testified that he was not physically violent until closer to the end. When it was pointed out to her that she did not tell the police that on February 17, she said, “I stated enough sir, but I don’t think I stated that,” and further that, “I stated a lot more today than I have in the last couple months.”

[151] When pressed that she lied to the police, Ms. Duby said did not lie because the police did not ask.

[152] Ms. Duby told the police that the difficulties Mr. House was having in the week before February 3, 2022, and the reason he stayed home, was a result of his inability to handle news about her cancer testing. This conflicted with her evidence about that week. Ms. Duby said she only told the police what she thought was relevant because she had a lot of distrust for the police.

[153] I have difficulty accepting Ms. Duby’s evidence relating to Mr. House’s symptoms in the month or so before February 3, 2022.

[154] Dr. Chaimowitz’s report indicates that Ms. Duby reported incidents of Mr. House having "episodes" of anger and rage where he would become physical towards her or property in the home and have no recollection of the episodes. Mr. House acknowledged to Dr. Chaimowitz and his team that he has had bouts of anger in the past with no recollection of these events. It does not appear from Dr. Chaimowitz’s report or evidence that he followed up on the particulars of these reports. This does not impact either Ms. Duby or Mr. House’s credibility but raises a question of whether Dr. Chaimowitz followed up on information relevant to his opinion, particularly since his opinion was based in part on the fact that Mr. House had not come to the attention of the authorities and, in Dr. Chaimowitz’s words, he did not think Mr. House is by nature a violent man.

The Week Before February 3, 2023

[155] Mr. House did not go to work the week before February 3, 2022. He said he was concerned that Ms. Duby was cheating on him, and he needed to get a hold of himself. He turned off his electrical outlets that week by sticking a knife in them because he thought they contained cameras. Ms. Duby said he stuck a knife in a light switch that week.

[156] Ms. Duby testified Mr. House stayed home the week before February 3, 2022 because Mr. House was experiencing some mental things and thought he was hearing things that were worse than usual. She said he stayed in a room with the television turned up to drown out the ringing in his ears or hearing people.

[157] Ms. Duby said that at one point during the week before February 3, 2022, Mr. House went upstairs and sealed up the attic access hatch. He also pulled the light switch apart and stuck a knife in it because he thought there was something in it.

February 3, 2022

[158] Mr. House has no specific memory of the quantity of drugs he consumed on February 3, 2022. The evidence he gave in-chief of his drug use that day was based on his “routine” over the prior months.

[159] Mr. House does not recall what time he woke up on February 3, 2022. He smoked marijuana when he woke up. He also snorted a Percocet. Ms. Duby said she gave him two Percocet pills on February 3, 2022 and then left. Mr. House was picked up for work around 12:30 p.m. He got his drugs, went inside to consume the half gram of cocaine but said he did not take the Percocet he was given. He took that Percocet about half an hour after he arrived at the job site as well as a quarter gram of cocaine and some marijuana. At the first break a couple of hours later, he took another quarter gram of cocaine and a Percocet. But he is not entirely sure as he was basing this upon his usual routine.

[160] Mr. House said he was feeling pain in the back of his head and ringing in his ear. He started to experience pain in his lower neck. He asked his brother to crack his back, but it did not work. He asked “Tommy” to crack his back. Tommy gave him a shoulder massage. The pain in his ear and head were worse suddenly and became excruciating. He thought Tommy caused it. He testified that he recalls the ringing being 100 times louder on February 3, 2022, and feeling that his head was going to explode. Mr. House punched Tommy two or three times and ran out the back door. He remembers putting a stick in his ear and felt it break off in his ear which made it worse.

[161] Mr. House testified that he does not recall running in a snowstorm without a coat, or the cottage. He does not remember the people in the cottage, a knife, digging at his head with the knife, chasing Paul Pender with the knife, stabbing him, the immediate aftermath of the stabbing, the police arriving, or what he said to the police. Mr. House said he does not remember anything until some point when he was in the hospital interacting with the nurse.

Findings of Fact Regarding Mr. House’s Symptoms

[162] I have considered the totality of the evidence with respect to Mr. House’s symptoms prior to February 3, 2022, some of which is summarized above.

[163] The evidence of Mr. House’s drug use is somewhat inconsistent. What emerges though is a clear picture that he had been abusing drugs for a long period of time, particularly in the year or so leading up to February 3, 2022.

[164] I find that Mr. House did not drink, smoke marijuana, or use drugs before the age of 17. I find that he began using marijuana when he was 17 and by the time he was 21 he was using it regularly. He began drinking when he was about 18. Mr. House used Percocet occasionally beginning when he was 18 and began using it regularly at least by the time he was about 24 or 25. He began using cocaine around the time he was 19 or 20 and used it occasionally for a few years, then increased his usage over time.

[165] In 2019, Mr. House abstained from using cocaine and Percocet for about 10 months, until late 2019. During that time, he used marijuana every day. After relapse, Mr. House began using cocaine and Percocet again, with his use becoming heavy after June 2020. In the year or so before February 3, 2022, Mr. House used cocaine, Percocet, and marijuana every day right up until February 3, 2022.

[166] As of February 3, 2022, Mr. House typically consumed about 1.5 grams of cocaine throughout the day as well as Percocet and marijuana. He consumed half a gram of cocaine and one or two Percocet pills when he woke up and before leaving for work around noon. When he arrived at work, he consumed another quarter gram of cocaine, a Percocet, and some marijuana. He consumed another quarter gram of cocaine and a Percocet at the first break. He was provided with and consumed another half gram of cocaine later in the day.

[167] I find that Mr. House began to see what he called spirits as an early adolescent. His interpretation of the meaning of the spirits he saw was influenced by his Indigenous heritage. I find that he began to yell at the spirits to leave at least by the time when he was 21 or 22 years old and that this continued right up until February 3, 2022, including during 2019 when he was not using cocaine and Percocet.

[168] I find that Mr. House had a paranoid belief that he was being followed which began before he started using drugs or drinking alcohol. It intensified over time to the point where he began to hear things in the house, and he eventually came to believe that there were people in the attic. The evidence suggests and I accept that this more specific belief occurred in the two or three years before February 3, 2022.

[169] It is difficult to determine precisely when Mr. House began to believe that there was a camera in his ear and when he truly became obsessed with a belief that there were cameras being planted in his home. Mr. Stevens-Ferreira and Mr. House’s evidence suggests that this belief did not begin until after June 2020. I find that some time before February 3, 2022, Mr. House developed a delusional belief that there was something in his ear that at some point he came to believe was a camera, and that he believed that there were cameras planted in his home or that someone was trying to place cameras in his home.

[170] I find Ms. Duby’s evidence as to Mr. House’s suicide attempts and the incidents of violence in the month before February 3, 2022 was not credible and that Ms. Duby was embellishing Mr. House’s symptoms during that time. Notwithstanding that she says Mr. House attempted suicide twice and violently attacked her twice the week before February 3, 2022, Ms. Duby did not tell the police about these events. I do not accept Ms. Duby’s evidence about Mr. House’s suicide attempts in the month before February 3, 2022. Mr. House provided no such evidence. I do not accept Ms. Duby’s account of the two incidents of intimate partner violence. In doing so, I am cognizant that victims of intimate partner violence do not necessarily report such incidents to the police or others and that this alone does not undermine their credibility.

[171] I find that Mr. House did have episodes of anger directed toward Ms. Duby but did not recall the events.

[172] I find that on February 3, 2022, Mr. House was driven out of the house where he was working because of excruciating pain in his ear and head. Once outside, he put a stick in his ear and believed it broke off in his ear. I find that Mr. House has no memory of what happened after that, until in the hospital when he was interacting with the nurse.

[173] I find that while in hospital after stabbing Paul Pender, Mr. House continued to believe that there was something in his ear and the next morning, during the police interview, Mr. House believed there was a camera in his ear.

The Expert Evidence

[174] The reports of Dr. Gojer and Dr. Chaimowitz contain statements made to them by Mr. House, Ms. Duby, and others. While the experts can relate what they have been told by Mr. House as a basis of their opinion, the statements are not admitted for the truth of the statements and they are not proof of the facts contained therein: R. v. Kirby, 1985 CanLII 3646 (ON CA), [1985] O.J. No. 166, 10 O.A.C. 356, at para. 59; R. v. Lavallee, 1990 CanLII 95 (SCC), [1990] 1 S.C.R. 852.

[175] The utterances or statements made by Mr. House in the Agreed Facts and to the police in the hours after his arrest are relevant to and admissible in support of the psychiatric expert opinion proffered at trial: R. v. Edgar (2000), 2000 CanLII 5162 (ON CA), 142 C.C.C. (3d) 401 (Ont. C.A.). The probative value lies in the extent to which the utterances appear to be irrational or delusional: Edgar, at paras. 23 and 24.

[176] I note that both experts agreed that Mr. House suffers from a substance use disorder.

Dr. Chaimowitz’s Assessment of Mr. House

[177] Dr. Chaimowitz and his team assessed Mr. House in hospital for 60 days. Dr. Chaimowitz met with Mr. House about once a week for an hour. He interviewed Ms. Duby in Mr. House’s presence.

[178] Dr. Chaimowitz’s report includes the Psychological Assessment Note prepared by Dr. Mamak dated June 8, 2022. Dr. Mamak noted that:

In reviewing his history, as stated, it does appear that Mr. House was experiencing a variety of psychiatric symptoms in the months prior to the index offence. Specifically, he reported symptoms consistent with ideas of reference and paranoid ideation.

[179] Dr. Chaimowitz did not believe that Mr. House was malingering. He accepted that Mr. House had no recollection of what occurred the evening of the stabbing. His overriding impression was that Mr. House was a kind, thoughtful, remorseful individual struggling with what he had done.

[180] Dr. Chaimowitz’s opinion was that Mr. House did not meet the criteria for a mental disorder. He is of the opinion that Mr. House chose to use drugs, and the consequence of using those drugs was that he suffered a psychotic episode that led to the death of Paul Pender. He said that absent Mr. House using the substances he did, and absent “whatever happened on that day with whatever combination of things that were going on with him”, he would not do it again.

Dr. Gojer’s assessment of Mr. House

[181] Dr. Gojer met with Mr. House for five hours over three different days in 2023. He spoke with Ms. Duby although he does not think what she said is reliable. He met with Mr. House’s mother but did not find her to be reliable. He spoke with Mr. Stevens-Ferreira after preparing his report and reviewed his testimony.

[182] In Dr. Gojer’s opinion, if the symptoms predated drug use, presented themselves at the time of the offence, were chronic and continuous even after a month of no longer using drugs, and if medication was required to control the symptoms, Mr. House is suffering from a mental illness.

[183] Taking into account Mr. House’s symptoms before he began to use drugs, his ongoing symptoms over the years, the witnesses’ description of Mr. House’s conduct at the cottage the night of February 3, 2022 as set out in the Agreed Facts, the body cam video, the police interview video, the ongoing symptoms described by Dr. Chaimowitz, and that anti-psychotic medication was required to control Mr. House’s symptoms, Dr. Gojer’s opinion is that Mr. House:

a. suffers from a mental illness, specifically, schizophrenia and a differential diagnosis of schizophrenia spectrum disorder or other psychotic disorder;

b. could not exercise rational thought and choice on the night of February 3, 2022;

c. did not appreciate the nature and consequences of his behaviour;

d. suffered from a psychosis on the evening of February 3, 2022 which was a continuation of a pre-existing belief system and delusions arising out of a mental illness; and

e. was disconnected from his surroundings and was in a state of automatism as a result of the psychotic state he was in.

[184] Dr. Gojer also opines that Mr. House has suffered from chronic depression better understood as a persistent depressive disorder.

Schizophrenia

[185] Dr. Chaimowitz testified that schizophrenia is understood as a spectrum with different subtypes. For some, schizophrenia conditions accelerate quickly; for some it is chronic; for some it is characterized by delusions and hallucinations; for some only delusions; some people have disorganized thinking; some have rapid cognitive decline; some have flat affect; and usually there is social and occupational decline. There are variations of intensity and the ratio of those symptoms.

[186] Dr. Chaimowitz testified that schizophrenia usually, but not always, begins in the late teens or early twenties and the primary symptoms are hallucinations and delusion. He acknowledged that many people develop schizophrenia even if no one else in the family has it, but chances are higher if someone in the family has it. Schizophrenia is generally a progressive condition, and individuals usually come to the attention of the authorities as the disease progresses. Dr. Chaimowitz acknowledged that some people with schizophrenia can do some of the things Mr. House has been able to do. He agreed that substance use and stressors may contribute to schizophrenia if Mr. House had a predisposition for it and that long-standing substance abuse was a factor that could make Mr. House’s brain more vulnerable to a psychotic disorder.

[187] Dr. Chaimowitz did not exclude a diagnosis of schizophrenia but thinks such a diagnosis is “way less” likely, and that what happened on February 3, 2022 was a result of the drugs taken. His report states that “[i]t is possible that the paranoid delusions that he experienced in the lead up to the index offence, and that he continued to manifest during his detention and hospitalization, were early signs of a major mental disorder, such as schizophrenia or a delusional disorder.” He notes that “it is quite possible that these delusional ideas and beliefs were a function of sustained drug use. Notably, with the use of antipsychotic medications, these symptoms have abated”. I do not read “possible” or “quite possible” as rising to the level of “more likely than not”.

[188] Dr. Chaimowitz acknowledged the possibility that Mr. House was suffering from schizophrenia but was unwavering in his opinion that he was not. He said that even if he had schizophrenia, were it not for the drugs that he took that day, he would not have committed the offence. In Dr. Chaimowitz’s view, Mr. House used drugs which changed his mental status, and he developed psychotic symptoms.

[189] Dr. Chaimowitz’s opinion that Mr. House did not have schizophrenia was based on several factors. Schizophrenia has a hereditary component which was absent from Mr. House’s family. The deterioration in relationships, education or work usually associated with schizophrenia were not present in Mr. House’s life. He said notwithstanding his many challenges, Mr. House was able to graduate from high school, maintain a long-term relationship, maintain a residence, continued to work in various capacities, volunteered, stayed out of the criminal justice system, and did his best to raise five children with his spouse.

[190] In Dr. Chaimowitz’s opinion, Mr. House’s paranoid symptoms, hallucinations, hearing things and believing things were happening around him was caused by long-standing substance abuse. In his opinion, Mr. House seeing spirits was not a “culture bound” experience. In his view, the acute, rapid escalation to being a violent incomprehensible person was substance induced and not schizophrenia.

[191] Dr. Gojer indicated similar symptoms of schizophrenia to those identified by Dr. Chaimowitz. He included symptoms like staring into space or catatonic symptoms. Dr. Gojer noted that it is common that people have both substance use disorder and schizophrenia.

[192] Dr. Gojer agreed that a diagnosis of schizophrenia requires a history of ongoing delusions and hallucination for an extended time. There can be a genetic component that can be triggered by stress, trauma, or use of drugs. A genetic history of schizophrenia is not determinative but could add support to a finding of schizophrenia. There is no single cause for schizophrenia.

[193] Dr. Gojer testified that talk of being followed is strong evidence of persecutory or paranoid delusions. Hearing or seeing things that are not there are an indication of hallucinations. These are prominent features of psychotic illness, particularly schizophrenia. The longer symptoms are present, the more likely the person has a mental illness. Dr. Gojer testified that some people with schizophrenia are high functioning and can complete degrees and maintain jobs, depending on the impact of the delusion and hallucinations on their functioning.

[194] Dr. Gojer explained schizophrenia spectrum disorder is applicable where a person does not have all the symptoms of schizophrenia, or they exist in varying degrees, duration, timing, or causative factors.

[195] Dr. Chaimowitz said that the symptoms of substance-induced psychosis in the acute moment feel and sound very much like the same symptoms as a psychotic episode of schizophrenia. In the report, Dr. Mamak says it is very difficult to tease apart whether Mr. House’s symptoms of paranoia were triggered by his substance use or whether his substance use served to elevate or bring to the surface symptoms that were already present.

[196] Dr. Gojer agreed that it can be difficult to determine whether the use of drugs with potential psychotic effects brought out the mental illness, aggravated a mental illness, or simulated a mental illness. If the person uses a drug like cocaine that has the potential to cause psychosis in the time prior to the offence, it is more difficult to assess. He said one must then determine when the symptoms began to manifest, whether the systems manifested leading up to the event, and whether the cessation of drugs affected the symptoms. Not knowing the amount of and the strength of the drugs taken makes it difficult to determine whether the drugs caused the psychotic episode. He said it is possible that the drugs made the illness worse, or that an excess of drugs on that day caused the acute psychosis.

[197] Dr. Gojer testified that heavy use of cocaine could cause psychosis; it depends on the quantity of cocaine taken and a person’s vulnerability to developing a mental illness. He said cocaine use is causally connected to psychosis and cannabis is associated with psychosis but not causally connected.

[198] Dr. Gojer agreed that many of the symptoms and factors for a diagnosis of substance induced psychotic disorder apply equally to a diagnosis of schizophrenia or schizophrenia spectrum disorder, although in his view not all of them applied in these circumstances. In his opinion, substance induced psychotic disorder did not apply because Mr. House’s symptoms preceded the use of substances by Mr. House and because the symptoms continued more than two months after Mr. House was no longer using cocaine, Percocet or marijuana.

Persistence of Symptoms After Cessation of Drug Use

[199] Dr. Chaimowitz’s report notes that while in hospital Mr. House continued to report odd beliefs that he was being followed and watched by cameras but at no point did Mr. House “endorse” experiencing visual or auditory hallucinations. Dr. Chaimowitz testified that in hospital, in his care, Mr. House expressed concerns about something being in his right ear and that some of Mr. House’s symptoms continued.

[200] Mr. House testified that since his arrest he has been on anti-psychotic medication. He reports feeling much better and that the medications are working. He feels less anxious, his thinking has slowed down, and the medication has “slowed down” his seeing things and the ringing in his head. When his dosage was decreased, Mr. House felt like he was seeing things more and feeling more like he was being watched. He requested an increase in his medication. He said that he had seen spirits as recently as a few days before he testified.

[201] I find that Mr. House continued to see spirits after February 3, 2022, and continued to believe that there was something in his right ear and that he was being followed and watched by cameras, but the anti-psychotic medication lessened the symptoms.

[202] Dr. Chaimowitz testified that there is good evidence to suggest that long-standing use of drugs can change the brain and lead to a more consistent and longer standing psychosis. Dr. Gojer agrees with Dr. Chaimowitz that long-standing drug use can change the brain. He said that once the damage is done to the brain, it cannot be reversed and it constitutes a mental illness from a psychiatric point of view because of the effect on the brain and changes to the brain over time.

[203] In Dr. Gojer’s view, the persistence of symptoms after several months points clearly to schizophrenia and similar disorders. In Dr. Chaimowitz’s view, the persistence of symptoms might be because of the ongoing effects of the long-term use of psychotic drugs. Dr. Chaimowitz said that drug induced psychotic symptoms can continue for months or years after cessation of drug use. Dr. Gojer disagrees. He testified that the most recent version of the DSM-V addressing symptoms of substance induced psychotic disorder was released in September 2023 and it did not change the example used in that section that symptoms continuing beyond a month suggest a diagnosis other than substance induced psychotic disorder.

[204] To Dr. Gojer, it is significant that Mr. House continued to have symptoms while in the hospital under Dr. Chaimowitz’s assessment over two and a half months after Mr. House stopped using drugs. Further, it is significant that he continued to have symptoms while on anti-psychotic medication. In his view, this points to a chronic mental illness.

The Attack on Paul Pender

[205] Dr. Mamak noted that in terms of the offence:

[I]t does appear that Mr. House was experiencing symptoms of psychosis at the material time. He believed that a camera was embedded in his ear and that he was using sticks to dislodge it. He came to believe that a stick was still lodged in his ear and this prompted him to go to the victim’s residence. While it is unclear why exactly he attacked the victim, it is possible that his paranoid thoughts may have extended towards the victim in some manner, prompting him to chase and then attack him.

[206] Dr. Chaimowitz’s report also states that the psychotic episode took place on the background of a number of years of delusional ideation and Mr. House likely misinterpreted the victim as an aggressor. The report says that “[i]t is likely that the victim was caught up in Mr. House's persecutory delusions, and as a consequence, Mr. House stabbed the victim.”

[207] Dr. Chaimowitz testified that something happened whereby Mr. House incorporated Paul Pender into his delusions and then chased and stabbed him to death. He said, “all of a sudden the victim became part of whatever was out to get him, or persecuting him, and he went after the victim.” He also described it as Mr. House being driven by his delusion that something was going on in his head causing him to attack Paul Pender. Dr. Chaimowitz testified that Mr. House acted on his delusion that he thought he had something in his head. He was reacting to his unusual beliefs. When he became psychotic, he lost touch with reality and acted in accordance with these horrible ideas that led to tragic events.

Automatism

[208] Dr. Chaimowitz does not believe that Mr. House was in an automatistic state or acting as an automaton. Dr. Gojer believed Mr. House was in a state of automatism, a dissociative state, as a result of the psychotic state he was in which was connected to his mental disorder. Mr. House was so disconnected that his mental faculties were not keeping up with his actions.

Effect of trauma

[209] Dr. Chaimowitz said that Mr. House’s early life experiences of trauma, abuse, and deprivation, as well as his accident in which he was prescribed opioids predisposed Mr. House to drug addiction. He was of the view that Mr. House has had more than his fair share of negative events in his life out of his control impacting who he is today. He testified that Mr. House likely had significant handicaps in his life because of the deprivation and abuse in his formative years. The choices Mr. House made may have been a function of things well beyond his control. The trauma Mr. House experienced probably impacted his becoming a drug addict.

[210] Dr. Chaimowitz accepted the Statistics Canada data from June 2018 that substance-related disorders were four times higher for Indigenous persons living off reserve compared to the non-Indigenous cohort.

[211] I note that courts are required to take judicial notice of the intergenerational trauma suffered in Indigenous communities: R. v. Mercier, 2023 ONCA 98, at para. 19. There is also substantial evidence which supports a finding of intergenerational trauma manifesting itself in Mr. House’s life.

[212] Dr. Gojer testified that the type of trauma Mr. House experienced can cause a person to be more fragile and susceptible to a mental illness. It is a complicating factor, but not a causal factor.

Fetal Alcohol Syndrome Disorder (“FASD”)

[213] In Dr. Chaimowitz’s view, whether Mr. House has fetal alcohol syndrome disorder (“FASD”) is too speculative and of little connection to schizophrenia to be of significant weight. There was no admissible evidence that Mr. House’s mother drank while he was in utero. There is insufficient evidence before me to establish that FASD was a factor.

Hypothermia

[214] Dr. Chaimowitz agreed that hypothermia, for which Mr. House was treated, can cause confusion and delirium. He was of the view that Mr. House was not experiencing delirium in the hours following the stabbing. Dr. Gojer agreed that hypothermia could bring about the incoherence seen in the body cam video.

Issues with Dr. Chaimowitz’s Report and Evidence

[215] Dr. Gojer was critical of certain aspects of Dr. Chaimowitz’s assessment. In his view, it was not appropriate to prescribe anti-psychotic medication to Mr. House if Dr. Chaimowitz did not believe that the psychosis was caused by mental illness. Dr. Gojer believed it was appropriate to slowly reduce the medication to see if the symptoms persisted to determine if the psychosis was drug induced.

[216] Dr. Chaimowitz said treating Mr. House with anti-psychotic medications was necessary whether Mr. House suffered from schizophrenia or other sources of delusions or hallucinations. Although in theory it was possible to stop Mr. House’s medications, I accept Dr. Chaimowitz’s explanation that he had an obligation to treat Mr. House who was distressed and suicidal at times.

[217] Dr. Gojer said Dr. Chaimowitz’s team administered an abbreviated psychological assessment and could have administered a more fulsome test. However, in cross-examination he said that he had an independent psychologist review the assessment done by Dr. Chaimowitz’s team and he was satisfied and was confident in relying on the assessment done by Dr. Chaimowitz’s team. Dr. Gojer said a full-scale IQ test should have been done since there were indications of a learning disability. Nevertheless, Dr. Gojer relied on the testing and the findings set out in Dr. Chaimowitz’s report, much of which he agrees with except the conclusion as to what caused Mr. House’s psychotic episode on February 3, 2022.

[218] Dr. Mamak states in her assessment that Mr. House’s symptoms of psychosis, specifically paranoid beliefs and ideas of reference, “seem to have started when he began to abuse substances on a daily basis.” Notably, the report does not reference Mr. House seeing spirits or shadows or his belief that he was being followed before he began to use any substances.

[219] Dr. Chaimowitz testified that if Mr. House was experiencing symptoms such as looking out windows and being fearful of being followed as early as the ages of 10 to 17, or if Mr. House was seeing spirits and ordering them out of the house before he began using drugs it would not change his opinion, but he does not explain why in any satisfactory way. Dr. Chaimowitz does not satisfactorily explain how drug use subsequent to the onset of delusions can trigger those delusions.

[220] Dr. Chaimowitz testified that not everyone who describes issues like Mr. House had has schizophrenia or necessarily has a mental illness. He said people believe in all sorts of things such as the moon landing was faked, or that 9/11 was not real, or that people are being poisoned by airplane contrails. He said people who believe such things do not necessarily have delusions nor are mentally ill. In my view, these types of beliefs are of a different category of belief from those experienced by Mr. House. The examples given by Dr. Chaimowitz are beliefs shared by large groups of people. No doubt the reason people believe such things is complex, but Mr. House’s delusions are not of that category. They are very personal to him. The delusions focus on what is happening around Mr. House and are directed toward him. His delusions are not the beliefs of a community of believers who believe that someone is putting cameras in Mr. House’s home, or in his ear, or that non-existent people or spirits are in Mr. House’s presence.

[221] Dr. Chaimowitz also places emphasis on Mr. House’s declaration to the police after the stabbing that he “had a bad trip”. He noted that street drugs are often contaminated and of variable concentrations to support his view that the quantity of drugs consumed that day by Mr. House did not necessarily affect his conclusion that Mr. House had a psychotic episode caused by drug use. He acknowledged that there is no evidence of any other substances in the drugs taken by Mr. House, and he is speculating that substances other than the marijuana, cocaine or Percocet caused the psychotic episode. Further, Mr. House’s statement that he “had a bad trip” is not a clinical diagnosis. It could have reflected what happened, or it could be a statement made by someone suffering from hypothermia who is trying to grapple with understanding the psychotic episode and lack of memory of events.

[222] Dr. Chaimowitz said that if Mr. House had symptoms of schizophrenia years before February 3, 2022, it would have likely continued to progress until he came to the attention of medical personnel or the criminal justice system. He said that did not happen. In my view, Dr. Chaimowitz fails to take into account his own evidence that there are variations in the intensity and the ratio and progress of symptoms of schizophrenia and that some people can function to some extent with schizophrenia. Further, the symptoms did intensify over time. Finally, Mr. House did come to the attention of the criminal justice system in a most horrific way on February 3, 2022 when he was 31.

[223] As noted above, Dr. Chaimowitz did not pursue information provided by Mr. House as to past incidents where Mr. House lost memory of events which may have been an important consideration.

[224] Dr. Chaimowitz’s report does not refer to Mr. House abstaining from cocaine and opiates in 2019. He said he was aware of a period that Mr. House was not on drugs for up to a year but was not sure if it was from his time with Mr. House or from Dr. Gojer’s report. He said that if he did know this, it would not change his opinion because his experience is that the drugs used by Mr. House can have long-lasting psychotic symptoms which can go on for years without a diagnosis of schizophrenia.

Issues with Dr. Gojer’s Report

[225] Dr. Gojer’s opinion was not without issues. Unlike Dr. Chaimowitz’s report, Dr. Gojer’s report is not peer reviewed. Dr. Gojer was not as careful in his report as he could have been. In cross-examination, the Crown drew out various omissions. Dr. Gojer did not indicate in his report that one of Mr. House’s brothers was present at his interview with Mr. House’s mother. He summarized some but not all of the jail records. His report does not set out his concession that substance-induced psychosis is a possible diagnosis but that he disagrees with such a diagnosis.

[226] Unlike Dr. Chaimowitz’s report, Dr. Gojer’s report does not indicate that caution is required when taking information from someone in Mr. House’s position because the information they provide may be unreliable for many reasons. Dr. Gojer said this was because Mr. House did not have a memory of the event, but this does not address that there is much history taken from Mr. House of events before February 3, 2022, which underpins Dr. Gojer’s opinion.

[227] However, much of the history provided to Dr. Gojer is similar to that provided to Dr. Chaimowitz. Mr. House’s information provided to Dr. Gojer is somewhat more expansive. As set out in his report, Mr. House told Dr. Gojer the following things which did not form part of Mr. House’s testimony at trial:

a. he has experienced his thoughts being broadcast in the last three years;

b. he was getting messages from the television (a similar report was also noted in Dr. Chaimowitz’s report) or voices telling him to do things;

c. he has felt a conspiracy going on against him and he was going to be killed;

d. he thought that the government was behind all his experiences and that he was under surveillance by the government;

e. he has assaulted Ms. Duby on many occasions when doing drugs; and

f. he was hit in the head with a hammer when he was 20 (a similar report was also noted in Dr. Chaimowitz’s report).

[228] Dr. Gojer reported that Ms. Duby told him that:

The morning of the alleged offence, Bradley questioned her about talking to someone in the basement who knocked the TV down, and he went to the basement to check. He was talking to himself. He was frightened and angry.

[229] Neither Mr. House nor Ms. Duby testified to such events.

[230] Further, Dr. Gojer reports that Mr. House reported problems with depression since his childhood over his poverty and sexual abuse. Dr. Gojer appears to have used this for his diagnosis that Mr. House suffered from persistent depressive disorder. However, the only evidence Mr. House gave at trial with respect to depression was that he was depressed after his brother Richie died, some 11 years before the events of February 3, 2022.

Section 16 of the Criminal Code

[231] I must consider the specific principles that govern the NCR defence to determine whether s. 16 of the Criminal Code is applicable. If the NCR defence does not apply, I can then consider whether the intoxication defence is applicable if it is appropriate to do so on the facts of the case: R. v. Bouchard-Lebrun, 2011 SCC 58, [2011] 3 S.C.R. 575, at para. 40.

[232] Section 16 of the Criminal Code provides as follows:

(1) No person is criminally responsible for an act committed or an omission made while suffering from a mental disorder that rendered the person incapable of appreciating the nature and quality of the act or omission or of knowing that it was wrong.

(2) Every person is presumed not to suffer from a mental disorder so as to be exempt from criminal responsibility by virtue of subsection (1), until the contrary is proved on the balance of probabilities.

(3) The burden of proof that an accused was suffering from a mental disorder so as to be exempt from criminal responsibility is on the party that raises the issue.

[233] Mr. House has raised s. 16 and must prove on a balance of probabilities that, at the material time, he was suffering from a mental disorder that rendered him incapable of appreciating the nature and quality of the act or omission or of knowing that it was wrong: Bouchard-Lebrun, at para. 55.

[234] The Ontario Court of Appeal in R. v. Luedecke, 2008 ONCA 716, 93 O.R. (3d) 89, at paragraph 60, noted that mental disorder is defined in s. 2 of the Criminal Code as a "disease of the mind" and further:

[60] … That phrase, which is almost as old as the insanity defence itself, describes a legal and not a medical concept, the purpose of which is normative, not diagnostic: Rabey, per Martin J.A., at p. 13 O.R., pp. 473-74 C.C.C.; Parks, per La Forest J., at p. 898 S.C.R., p. 304 C.C.C.

[61] The broader the definition of mental disorder, the narrower the ambit of the "defence" of non-mental disorder automatism. Canadian courts have adopted a very broad definition. In R. v. Cooper, 1979 CanLII 63 (SCC), [1980] 1 S.C.R. 1149, [1979] S.C.J. No. 139, 51 C.C.C. (2d) 129, at p. 1159 S.C.R., at p. 144 C.C.C., Dickson J. said:

In summary, one might say that in a legal sense "disease of the mind" embraces any illness, disorder or abnormal condition which impairs the human mind and its functioning, excluding however, self-induced states caused by alcohol or drugs, as well as transitory mental states such as hysteria or concussion.

[235] At paragraph 59 of Bouchard-Lebrun, the Supreme Court, citing the decision of Dickson J. in Rabey v. the Queen, 1980 CanLII 44 (SCC), [1980] 2 S.C.R. 513, noted that the legal concept of mental disorder “is broad, embracing mental disorders of organic and functional origin, whether curable or incurable, temporary or not, recurring or non‑recurring.” The court in Bouchard-Lebrun goes on to note that the inclusive nature of the definition of mental disorder can be explained by Parliament’s wish to give the public a high level of protection from a person who could be a threat to others. At paragraph 60, the court noted that the “mental disorder” concept continues to evolve, which means that it can be adapted continually to advances in medical science. As a result, an exhaustive list of the mental conditions that constitute diseases of the mind cannot be drawn up.

[236] As noted by the Ontario Court of Appeal in R. v. H.(S.), 2014 ONCA 303, 310 C.C.C. (3d) 455, at para. 78, what is critical is not so much the medical characterization of the condition or its origin in medical terms, but rather its effect on the capacity of the accused.

Expert Evidence

[237] In Worrie, at paragraph 97, the Ontario Court of Appeal noted that:

Although expert evidence is not always required (see R. v. Quenneville, 2010 ONCA 223, 207 C.R.R. (2d) 360, at para. 28, leave to appeal refused, [2010] S.C.C.A. No. 409), “[a] proper understanding and weighing of expert opinion often plays a central role in the determination of whether or not an accused should be found not guilty by reason of mental disorder”: R. v. Molodowic, 2000 CSC 16, 2000 SCC 16, [2000] 1 S.C.R. 420, at para. 10.

[238] However, an expert’s opinion on the legal issue of whether the mental condition of the accused constitutes a “mental disorder” within the meaning of the Criminal Code has “little or no evidentiary value”.

[239] A trial judge should not be influenced by an expert’s opinion as to the proper categorization of the respondent's medical condition when deciding whether, as a matter of law and for policy reasons, the condition should or should not be characterized as a disease of the mind: Luedecke, at para. 113.

[240] At paragraphs 97 through 102 of Worrie, the court considered decisions of the Supreme Court of Canada and the Ontario Court of Appeal and summarized the principles applicable to expert opinions in determining whether an accused suffers from a mental disorder:

(i) the probative value of expert psychiatric testimony is to be assessed in the same manner as any other testimony;

(ii) a trier of fact is not bound by the expert psychiatric opinions even when they are unanimous and uncontradicted by other experts;

(iii) there must be a rational foundation in the evidence to reject the expert opinion;

(iv) it may be unreasonable to disregard the expert evidence particularly where the experts’ opinions are unanimous, their evidence is uncontradicted and not seriously challenged, and there is nothing in the conduct of the commission of the crime that would raise any serious question as to the validity of the experts’ conclusion; and

(v) a rational basis for rejecting expert opinion evidence that an accused is NCR may consist of, among other things, a flaw in the expert’s reasoning, a frailty in the basis for the opinion, or a conflict between the opinion and the inferences that can be drawn from the other evidence.

[241] Finally, a judge accords less weight to an expert opinion if it is not based on facts proven at trial, or where it was based on factual assumptions with which they disagree: R. v. Richmond, 2016 ONCA 134, 334 C.C.C. (3d) 315, at para. 57.

Two-Stage Test

[242] As set out by the Supreme Court of Canada in Bouchard-Lebrun at paragraph 56, an accused who wishes to successfully raise the defence of mental disorder must meet the requirements of a two‑stage statutory test. The first stage involves characterizing the mental state of the accused. The key issue at this stage is whether the accused was suffering from a mental disorder in the legal sense at the time of the alleged events. The second stage of the defence concerns the effects of the mental disorder. At this stage, it must be determined whether, owing to his or her mental condition, the accused was incapable of appreciating the nature and quality of the act or omission or of knowing that it was wrong.

[243] The Supreme Court in Bouchard-Lebrun at paragraph 69 noted that when confronted with a difficult fact situation involving a state of toxic psychosis that emerged while the accused was intoxicated, a court should start from the general principle that temporary psychosis is covered by the exclusion in Cooper v. The Queen, 1979 CanLII 63 (SCC), [1980] 1 S.C.R. 1149, that disease of the mind excludes self‑induced states caused by alcohol or drugs. The accused can rebut the presumption provided for in s. 16(2) by showing that, at the material time, he was suffering from a disease of the mind that was unrelated to the intoxication‑related symptoms. To determine whether an accused has discharged the burden of proof in this respect, the court should adopt the “more holistic approach” described by Bastarache J. in R. v. Stone, 1999 CanLII 688 (SCC), [1999] 2 S.C.R. 290. This will enable a court to determine whether the mental condition of an accused at the material time constitutes a “mental disorder” for the purposes of s. 16.

[244] The court should use a flexible approach structured around two analytical tools and certain policy considerations to distinguish mental conditions that fall within the scope of s. 16 from those covered by Cooper’s exclusion of “self‑induced states caused by alcohol or drugs”: Bouchard-Lebrun, at para. 70. The analytical tools set out in Stone and endorsed in Bouchard-Lebrun are the internal cause factor and the continuing danger factor.

[245] The Ontario Court of Appeal in H.(S.) at paragraph 80 put it this way:

To determine whether a condition amounts to a disease of the mind, a trial judge is to take a holistic approach informed by the internal cause factor, the continuing danger factor and other policy considerations: Stone, at para. 203. The internal cause factor refers to a malfunctioning of the mind that arises from a source in the accused’s psychological or emotional make-up, as opposed to being produced by a specific external factor, such as a concussion: Rabey (Ont. C.A.), at para. 59. Especially relevant to the continuing danger factor are the psychiatric history of the accused and the likelihood that the trigger alleged to have caused the automatistic episode will recur: Stone, at para. 214.

[246] Although courts can seek assistance from the existing case law, applying the “more holistic approach” from Stone, courts should determine on a case‑by‑case basis whether the mental condition of each accused is included in or excluded from the definition of “disease of the mind” proposed in Cooper: Bouchard-Lebrun, at para. 77.

Stage One – Disease of the Mind

The Internal Cause Factor

[247] The Supreme Court explained in paragraphs 71 and 72 of Bouchard-Lebrun that the internal cause factor involves comparing the accused with a normal person. The trial judge must consider the nature of the trigger and determine whether a normal person in the same circumstances might have reacted to it as did the accused. There is no reason why the trigger associated with the internal cause factor cannot consist of alcohol or drug use contemporaneous with the offence. The comparison between the circumstances of the accused and those of a normal person will be objective and may be based on the psychiatric evidence. The more the psychiatric evidence suggests that a normal person, that is, a person suffering from no disease of the mind, is susceptible to such a state, the more justified the courts will be in finding that the trigger is external. Such a finding would exclude the condition of the accused from the scope of s. 16. The reverse also holds true.

[248] Dr. Chaimowitz does not believe that Mr. House suffered from schizophrenia, but acknowledges it is a possibility. For the reasons set out earlier, I do not accept Dr. Chaimowitz’s conclusion that Mr. House did not suffer from schizophrenia. Both experts agree that Mr. House experienced symptoms over the years that are associated with schizophrenia. The evidence suggests that there is a possibility that Mr. House has schizophrenia. However, a finding of a mental illness such as schizophrenia pursuant to the DSM is not required for a finding that Mr. House suffered from a mental disorder.

[249] I find that there is substantial evidence that Mr. House’s internal makeup is what led to the psychosis. Mr. House was seeing spirits and believed he was being followed before he used drugs. The symptoms intensified over time.

[250] The evidence is that trauma, and certainly the considerable trauma experienced by Mr. House, can predispose a person to drug addiction and can cause a person to be more fragile and susceptible to a mental illness. The evidence of the experts is that prolonged use of the drugs consumed by Mr. House over many years results in changes to the brain.

[251] Mr. House did not have a new psychotic belief that sprung up out of nowhere on February 3, 2022. It was based on a delusional belief system that had been in place prior to the offence. The psychotic episode that led to the attack on and killing of Paul Pender on February 3, 2022, incorporated a pre-existing delusion and brought Paul Pender into Mr. House’s pre-existing delusion. Paul Pender was a stranger to Mr. House. Mr. House came upon him seemingly at random. Paul Pender sought to help Mr. House but he became incorporated into Mr. House’s delusion resulting in Mr. House turning on him and killing him.

[252] There was no cogent evidence from the expert witnesses as to how long it would take Mr. House to come out of a psychotic episode if it was drug induced as compared to if it was induced by mental illness, such as schizophrenia. In the hours following the killing of Paul Pender after he became coherent, Mr. House reported to the nurse and the police that there was a chip or camera in his ear. Dr. Chaimowitz testified that Mr. House believed there was a camera in his ear months later while in hospital for assessment. His other symptoms persisted for months, even on anti-psychotic medication. Mr. House’s symptoms were not transient or a temporary psychosis.

[253] I find that it was Mr. House’s pre-existing delusions and psychological makeup which impacted him at the time he killed Paul Pender.

The Continuing Danger Factor

[254] In paragraph 73 of Bouchard-Lebrun, the court explained that the continuing danger factor is directly related to the need to ensure public safety. The purpose of this factor is to assess the likelihood of recurring danger to others. Where a condition is likely to present a recurring danger, there is a greater chance that it will be regarded as a disease of the mind. To assess this danger, the court must consider, among other factors, the psychiatric history of the accused and the likelihood that the trigger alleged to have caused the episode will recur.

[255] A danger will be recurring only if it is likely to arise again independently of the exercise of the will of the accused. The recurrence of danger is not a factor linked to voluntary behaviour by the accused. It is a danger that persists despite the will of the accused. As a corollary to this principle, a danger to public safety that might be voluntarily created by the accused in the future by consuming drugs would not be the result of a “mental disorder” for the purposes of s. 16: Bouchard-Lebrun, at para. 74.

[256] I note that in Bouchard-Lebrun the court was dealing with an accused who only occasionally used drugs and could abstain from doing so. The court notes its decision might have been different if the appellant had a dependency on drugs that affected his ability to stop using them voluntarily as the likelihood of recurring danger might then be greater: Bouchard-Lebrun, at para. 83.

[257] The Ontario Court of Appeal in Luedecke noted at paragraph 73 that public safety considerations may dictate that any abnormal mental state rendering a person incapable of controlling his or her conduct should be characterized as a disease of the mind regardless of the medical characterization or diagnosis.

[258] At paragraphs 91 and 111 of Luedecke, the court noted that when evaluating the risk of repetition and hence the danger to the public, trial judges must not limit their inquiry only to the risk of further violence while in an automatistic state. Rather, trial judges must examine the risk of the recurrence of the factors or events or circumstances that triggered the accused's automatistic state. In my view, similar considerations apply in the circumstances of this case.

[259] Mr. House’s malfunctioning of the mind on February 3, 2022 was not caused exclusively by self-induced intoxication and drug use. It was triggered by a combination of Mr. House’s inherent psychological makeup which included his susceptibility to drug use from trauma, his ongoing delusions which pre-dated his drug use and which were likely heightened by the long-term use of drugs, and his drug use on February 3, 2022.

[260] In Dr. Chaimowitz’s opinion, Mr. House is likely to go back to using drugs again. Dr. Gojer’s view was that it would be challenging for Mr. House to abstain from drugs and his prognosis is guarded. The underlying illness must be treated. He was of the view that Mr. House continues to pose a significant threat to the public and to his spouse without treatment for the underlying issues. Further drug use could further worsen the symptoms.

[261] There is ample evidence before me that Mr. House is unlikely to be able to stop using drugs without treatment. Similarly, his delusions are unlikely to go away without treatment. Dr. Chaimowitz conceded that if Mr. House continues to use drugs something similar could happen. Dr. Gojer testified that Mr. House continues to be a danger. I find that Mr. House continues to pose an ongoing risk to the public. In my view, it is more likely than not that the triggering events and factors would recur.

[262] Considering all of the evidence, I find that both the internal cause factor and the continuing danger factor establish on a balance of probabilities that Mr. House suffered from a disease of the mind which was operative at the time that he killed Paul Pender.

Stage Two – Appreciating the Nature and Quality of the Act or Knowing it was Wrong

[263] The recent decision of the Court of Appeal in R. v. Bharwani, 2023 ONCA 203, 424 C.C.C. (3d) 197, summarizes the applicable principles for determining whether an accused knows the moral wrongfulness of the act:

[231] In the s. 16(1) context, the word “wrong” means both legally and morally wrong: R. v. Chaulk, 1990 CanLII 34 (SCC), [1990] 3 S.C.R. 1303, at pp. 1354-55. In R. v. Woodward, 2009 ONCA 911, at para. 5, this court reiterated that an accused cannot know the moral wrongfulness of his acts if he “was incapable of understanding that his acts were wrong according to the ordinary moral standards of reasonable members of the community.”

[232] An NCR determination depends upon whether an accused person was, at the time of the offence, capable of rationally evaluating their conduct: R. v. Oommen, 1994 CanLII 101 (SCC), [1994] 2 S.C.R. 507, at p. 518. Indeed, in Oommen, the court explained that the “crux” of the s. 16(1) inquiry is to determine “whether the accused [lacked] the capacity to rationally decide whether the act [was] right or wrong and hence to make a rational choice about whether to do it or not”: at p. 518.

[233] In R. v. Dobson, 2018 ONCA 589, 48 C.R. (7th) 410, at para. 24, leave to appeal refused, [2019] S.C.C.A. No. 70, Doherty J.A. had this to say about the interpretation of Oommen:

Oommen, as interpreted in the judgments of this court, holds that an accused who has the capacity to know that society regards his actions as morally wrong and proceeds to commit those acts cannot be said to lack the capacity to know right from wrong. As a result, he is not NCR, even if he believed that he had no choice but to act, or that his acts were justified.

However, an accused who, through the distorted lens of his mental illness, sees his conduct as justified, not only according to his own view, but also according to the norms of society, lacks the capacity to know that his act is wrong. That accused has an NCR defence. Similarly, an accused who, on account of mental disorder, lacks the capacity to assess the wrongfulness of his conduct against societal norms lacks the capacity to know his act is wrong and is entitled to an NCR defence.

[264] In his report, Dr. Chaimowitz opines that the psychotic episode did not deprive Mr. House of the ability to appreciate the nature and quality of his actions, but likely precluded him from being able to distinguish right from wrong and he was deprived of understanding the moral wrongfulness of his actions in stabbing Paul Pender.

[265] In cross-examination, Dr. Chaimowitz testified that Mr. House did not know what he was doing was wrong, he was irrational, his thinking was very disturbed, and he did not have all his faculties about him. He said that Mr. House did not know what was going on when he said, “I want to help”. Dr. Chaimowitz does not believe that Mr. House knew he had just stabbed Paul Pender. He said Mr. House’s statements at that point were not connected and reflected a disorganized mind.

[266] Dr. Gojer agreed that Mr. House was not capable of knowing that his actions were morally wrong.

[267] I see no reason to deviate from the opinion of the experts on this issue. On the totality of the evidence, Mr. House was not able to rationally evaluate his conduct and lacked the capacity to know his act was wrong. He was incapable of understanding that the act was wrong according to the ordinary moral standards of reasonable members of society. This is supported by the evidence, including his conduct in the moments immediately prior to chasing and killing Paul Pender as described by the witnesses, and by his mental state in the immediate aftermath of the event as demonstrated in the Agreed Facts and the videos.

[268] This is sufficient for an NCR finding and it is not necessary to resolve whether Mr. House did not appreciate the nature and quality of his act, a question over which the opinion of the experts is divided.

verdict

[269] Therefore, I find that Mr. House killed Paul Pender on February 3, 2022, but that at the time he was suffering from a mental disorder pursuant to s. 16(1) of the Criminal Code. Accordingly, pursuant to 672.34, I render a verdict that Mr. House unlawfully caused the death of Paul Pender but is not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder.

[270] Both the Crown and Mr. House agree that Mr. House be remanded to the Ontario Review Board for disposition. I am satisfied that this is appropriate given the circumstances in this case. Therefore, Mr. House is remanded to the Ontario Review Board to make the disposition.

[271] A copy of my reasons, the transcript, the indictment and all other exhibits filed on this trial are to be sent to the Ontario Review Board forthwith.

[272] On consent, a warrant of committal is to issue for Mr. House to be taken to St. Joseph’s Healthcare Hamilton Forensic Psychiatry Program.

[273] On consent, pursuant to s. 672.46(2) the release order and specifically the no-contact order issued pursuant to s. 516(2) is varied as may be necessary such that there shall be a no contact order in relation to the following persons:

a. Allison Findlay;

b. Rob McDougall;

c. Patricia Remillard;

d. Ron Findlay;

e. Arlene Lipscey;

f. Finn-Pender Chapman;

g. Reuben Pender-Chapman;

h. Jamal Telesford; and

i. Pilar Chapman.

[274] I want to thank counsel for their assistance and thank all involved for their courtesy and respect throughout the trial. Thank you.

M. Bordin, J.

Released: January 3, 2024