Thread by @alysanmati

Dr. Rebecca Chauhan, the psychiatrist who assessed Alek Minassian for his autism spectrum diagnosis is being cross-examined by the Crown today. Follow along here:

thestar.com/news/gta/2020/…

Something to keep in mind during this trial: thestar.com/news/gta/2020/…

Here is my story from yesterday: thestar.com/news/gta/2020/…

She confirms that in her opinion the pervasive development disorder Minassian was diagnosed with around age 5 would have been an autism spectrum disorder under today's categories.

Crown prosecutor John Rinaldi is asking about what she knew prior to her interview with Minassian. She knew about what he'd done from the news and she had interviewed his parents who came in with a questionnaire she hadn't given them.

When she asked Minassian a question, he answered it directly but wouldn't elaborate. She would have to probe further with questions.

(This interview took place in September 2018, about five months after the attack)

We are pausing because we briefly lost both defence counsel.

The perils of Zoom court! They are back in now and the court reporter is reading back the evidence they missed.

We are now looking a page of handwritten notes from Dr. Chauhan. Her handwriting is hard to read. The question is about the puzzle test that is part of an autism diagnostic test.

Crown: Does Minassian mention Elliot Rodger on the day of the test?

Chauhan: None of his pre-occupations or interests interfered into the test.

Another assessor also gave this ADOS diagnostic test to Minassian from the defence team, Crown says. Results can vary, Chauhan replies and she says the conditions of her interview were not ideal. Crown says it's not a criticism

Chauhan doesn't know the results of that ADOS test (and neither do I, that expert hasn't testified).

No one has said anything about it in court but Dr. Chauhan is testifying from a room with bad lighting and we can barely see her face.

We are going through the different scoring between Chauhan's ADOS report and the other doctor's ADOS report. Part of the issue in difference is because she used an old scoring sheet. But Chauhan's scores are tending to indicate more serious symptoms.

We are on a break now for ten minutes. The court is investigating an unknown person who briefly entered the Zoom courtroom (judge thinks it could have been a staff person).

The biggest difference in scores between the doctors comes for "emphatic or emotional gestures." Chauhan gave Minassian a 3, which means "no or very limited." The other doctor gave him a 1 "some...but exaggerated or limited in frequency, appropriateness, integration or style."

They scored him the same on "comments on other's emotions/empathy" -- a 1 which is "communicates some understanding, labeling or response to an emotion in others" i.e. can spontaneously and correctly identify at least one emotion in another person.

Chauhan says Minassian wasn't showing gestures in their interview, doesn't want to read into it so much. He did have some understanding of social relationships and emotions, and of empathy even -- becoming distressed by images of starving children for example.

Nothing in the assessment spoke of another diagnosis than autism spectrum disorder, Chauhan said.

Crown asks why she spoke to Minassian a third time, after the assessment. That's when they spoke about the attack. She wanted to get more info about bullying, loneliness but it got sidetracked bc he spoke about fantasizing about school shootings.

She says she was asking him questions about the offences. Crown asks why since she didn't need that information.
She said Minassian is the one who started talking about it.

Crown: The problem I have is you called it a "significant impairment" in his ability to have reciprocal conversations. But you have pages of information he provided.

Chauhan: He gives information when asked questions. He never spontaneous builds conversation or engages in it

Crown: In this part of the test (talking about travel using a map) do you say you want to have a conversation?

Chauhan: Yes it's prefaced that way.

Crown: Do you still think he has a significant impairment in this way?

Chauhan: In that contrived situation yes.

Chauhan says the test is to get a sense of how a person would be, did see him struggle in having a conversation.

Crown: Did you see him have a conversation with anyone else?

Chauhan: No, he was in a seclusion suite.

She didn't watch the long police interview Minassian did with Det. Rob Thomas, speaking for more than three hours.

Crown: Would seeing it be helpful?

Chauhan says there is a difference between a back and forth or just giving facts. A police interview isn't a back and forth

Wouldn't expect it to be a good test of a reciprocal conversation

Crown: You haven't seen many police interviews then, they can be reciprocal conversations.

Chauhan said it would have been more useful to have seen in the "milieu" of the unit, interacting with other patients.

She says seeing Minassian being interviewed by other doctors would not be as good as seeing peer interaction.

Crown now asks if text conversations he had with friends and family be useful

Chauhan says yes

She didn't have access to any of that, wasn't aware that there were texts to look at.

Crown: You based his intellectual capacity on his vocabulary? Found it to be "normal" or "average"

Chauhan agrees though also knew there was some cognitive testing done later which say there was no issue there.

The testing actually found his intelligence to be in the "high average range." This fits with her general impression of Minassian.

He got a "very high score" on the test even compared to others with high-functioning autism spectrum disorder. The test found his cognitive functioning is not in range expected for people with more severe range of autism spectrum disorder.

Chauhan said there should be caution because intellectual functioning and autism spectrum disorder are different things.

The Crown keeps asking if he should put up sections of Chauhan's report on the screen. YES! Everyone but the public (and media) has the report so he doesn't share it.

Now we are looking at a section from Dr. Bradford's report. Minassian said he did identify at some level with Rodger but that he didn't feel as isolated. He said he didn't feel anger AND he said the Hallowe'en party rejection in 2013 he told police about didn't happen.

Part of this trial is trying to figure what of the many many things Minassian has claimed happened actually happened.

More from the Bradford report: Minasssian denies identifying with the incel movement though it seems "the fact or rumours that some or all of them had autism in some capacity was what drew him in."

Minassian said he saw some similarities with Elliot Rodger but they were not completely identical.

The Crown is asking about this because Chauhan stressed yesterday that Minassian seemed to be unable to see difference between him and Rodger.

Chauhan says its hard to say without speaking to the people who wrote these other reports.

Crown says Minassian did specify differences, just not to here.

Chauhan said with her he didn't seem to acknowledge glaring differences but they also didn't talk much about the incel movement.

Crown points out the differences she thinks matter may not have mattered to Minassian.

Chauhan said Minassian seemed very detail-oriented and she was surprised that he didn't

Crown said his interest was in their similarities. Why would he care Rodger was bi-racial?

Crown points out that Minassian pointed out to Dr. Bradford that he isn't angry, compared to Rodger and another mass shooter Chris Harper-Mercer. Also noted he isn't as isolated.

Chauhan says he'll have to ask Dr. Bradford.

The judge asks about when Chauhan learned about Rodger, who she said she had to Google. She says she thinks Minassian brought it up in the first interview and she looked it up and they spoke about it again.

She read the manifesto, or believes she did, or at least read something about Rodger before she did the last interview with him.

We are on the lunch break now till 1:15.