R. v. Amey (B.)

• Jurisdiction: Nova Scotia
• Judge: Ross, P.C.J.
• Date: 31 March 2009
• Citation: (2009), 278 N.S.R.(2d) 97 (PC),2009 NSPC 29
• Court: Provincial Court of Nova Scotia (Canada)

R. v. Amey (B.) (2009), 278 N.S.R.(2d) 97 (PC);

    886 A.P.R. 97

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2009] N.S.R.(2d) TBEd. JN.056

Her Majesty The Queen v. Bernard Amey

(1730266/267/268, 1808345-347, 1730861, 1860967, 1857462-464, 1860964, 1864360, 1862143-145, 1867829; 2009 NSPC 29)

Indexed As: R. v. Amey (B.)

Nova Scotia Provincial Court

Ross, P.C.J.

April 14, 2009.

Summary:

A court-ordered medical assessment determined, in March 2008, that the accused was unfit to stand trial because of memory problems resulting from alcohol induced dementia (Dr. Konfli). Months later, the accused's counsel sought a second opinion. Another psychiatrist (Dr. Aquino) determined that improvements in the accused's condition made him now fit to stand trial. A staff psychiatrist at the East Coast Forensic Hospital (Dr. Brunet) disagreed. Both Dr. Aquino (fit) and Drs. Brunet and Konfli (unfit) appeared before the Review Board, which found the accused fit to stand trial. The matter of the accused's fitness to stand trial came again before the Provincial Court for a de novo hearing.

The Nova Scotia Provincial Court held that the 73 year old accused remained unfit to stand trial.

Criminal Law - Topic 92.3

General principles - Mental disorder - General - Preliminary trial of issue of fitness - In March 2008, the accused was found unfit to stand trial because of memory problems resulting from alcohol induced dementia - Months later, the accused's counsel sought a second opinion - Another psychiatrist determined that improvements in the accused's condition made him now fit to stand trial - Two other psychiatrists disagreed - The Review Board found the accused fit to stand trial - The Nova Scotia Provincial Court determined that the 73 year old accused remained unfit to stand trial - While the accused generally understood the functions of a judge, counsel, etc., and appreciated that conviction had consequences, he remained unable to communicate with counsel in a meaningful way due to short and long term memory impairment - The accused did not possess the ability to relate trial testimony to past events and to assess, at least on a rudimentary level, the possible veracity of such evidence - The accused's mental illness not only compromised his memory of the underlying events, but deprived him of the ability to process and remember things that would happen during his trial - He was unable to retain and process, even at a basic level, what he might be told of these events by other witnesses - The court stated that if the accused were put on trial "he would be incapable of understanding the basis for an outcome which was contrary to his interests or beliefs, even though he may 'understand the possible consequences' in terms of punishment".

Criminal Law - Topic 109

General principles - Mental disorder - Insanity, automatism, etc. - Insanity - Preliminary issue respecting the ability of the accused to conduct his defence - [See Criminal Law - Topic 92.3 ].

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Bain (E.L.) (1994), 130 N.S.R.(2d) 332; 367 A.P.R. 332 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 46].

R. v. Taylor (D.R.M.) (1992), 59 O.A.C. 43; 77 C.C.C.(3d) 551 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 48].

R. v. Morrissey (P.) (2007), 230 O.A.C. 141; 54 C.R.(6th) 313 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 49].

R. v. Gorecki (No. 1) (1976), 14 O.R.(2d) 212 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 68].

Pritchard, Re (1836), 7 C. & P.R. 303, refd to. [para. 71].

Counsel:

Darcy MacPherson, for the Crown;

Ann Marie MacInnes, for the accused.

This matter was heard on March 31, 2009, at Sydney, N.S., before Ross, P.C.J., of the Nova Scotia Provincial Court, whose following oral decision of April 14, 2009, was filed in writing on April 27, 2009.