Thread by @alysanmati

We are back up today, and still talking about the Vineland-3 test of adaptive function which we went through in excruciating detail yesterday. Crown expert, forensic psychologist Dr. Percy Wright, said the test doesn't provide an accurate view of Minassian's function as an adult

(This is Alek Minassian's trial for 10 counts of first-degree murder and 16 counts of attempted murder. He is seeking to be found not criminally responsible for running down pedestrians in a rented van on Yonge St. on April 23, 2018).

You can find all my past coverage here: thestar.com/search.html?q=…

Here is what Minassian admitted to doing: thestar.com/news/gta/2020/…

The defence is suggesting that there some certain milestones in childhood that indicate whether someone will go onto be able to do things innately, or automatically in later life. Wright agrees, though he notes Minassian learned other strategies in his later life.

Defence said a zero score on a Vineland question shows you never met the milestone even as an adult. Can mean you don't do the thing until prompted, or that you can but choose not to.

This focus on childhood reflects autism research about the importance of early childhood development, defence says.

Wright said there is a correlation, yes.

You can follow my tweets here or in the link below, which has a short recap of yesterday's testimony. thestar.com/content/thesta…

We are going through the Vineland test again in detail, which is not conducive to live-tweeting.

Defence is trying to challenge Wright's view that the Vineland score isn't an accurate picture of Minassian's function. The Vineland results (a test done by the defence experts) are a key part of the defence expert report.

The test is filled out by Minassian's parents, it was done online.

The test does have a "scoring" tip about how to score if it's a behaviour that the person did it when younger but has now outgrown the behaviour.

Wright said these estimates are not as exact as you might hope for. What does outgrown mean? Hard for any rater to be precise in terms of interpreting if that means.

Defence notes there is a box to check if it's an estimate.

We are now looking at a version of the test in which a bunch of scores have been changed by the defence to account for the doubts expressed by Wright.

It doesn't entirely help. There is still concern about low scoring for Minassian going out during the day without supervision (Wright points out that he went to university by himself).

Question remains who's done this? Doesn't sound like the re-scoring of a psychologist. Defence said Wright got an email from the defence-retained psychologist who changed the answers to see what the score would be.

Judge asks how the final scores are generated with percentiles. Wright said it's done automatically by an algorithm.

We just started the lunch break. The last few questions were about the differences between Minassian and other mass shooters. Among them: Minassian didn't show signs of "narcissistic wounds." Back at 1:15.

We are back. Defence starts with a question about Minassian taking a long time to answer questions. Wright agrees. Defence says this is an autism compensation measure using his intellect, not innate like a neuroptyical person.

Wright says it depends. Quicker that most of us on some answers, but others about interpersonal things he has to talk himself through.

Wright said in the report some of his answers were based on his own perspectives rather than the perspectives of others, which would be more common for someone without autism. But Minassian would get to the answer in the end, unlike someone with more severe autism.

Wright concluded some of Minassian's burdens are related to autism, but not all of them. "He has many others." Having a disorder doesn't define who a person is, one component of who they are.

Defence wants an example of a burden Minassian has that isn't linked to his autism. Wright says Minassian's harsh self-criticism. Linked to his failures in school and failure in general.

Defence: Suggest his failures are rooted in and directly related to his autism.

Wright says many of his failures are related to his autism but in terms of how he copes and responds to the frustrations and setbacks it really depends a lot on the individual.

He won't adopt the defence suggestions that all his burdens come from his autism.

Wright said he is also socially avoidant, because he is afraid of failure and which also contributes to procrastination.

Defence: So this is not connected to his autism

Wright: Not saying not connected, but autism doesn't define a person.

Defence: Do you know who Simon Baron-Cohen is? (Wright does). He is a leading autism researcher in the world.

Wright: Wouldn't oppose the characterization.

Defence: Dr. Bradford quotes Dr. Baron-Cohen in his report, cites some articles on theory of mind.

Defence: Did you read those articles before you did your report.

Wright said no.

We are now looking at a paper by Baron-Cohen and Wheelwright titled: "The Empathy Quotient."

(And yes, as @liamdevlincasey has investigated, Simon Baron-Cohen is a cousin of Sacha Baron-Cohen)

Wright agrees in most people empathy is automatically triggered and it's not as easily triggered in people with autism. Has trouble with a line that says empathy is "glue" of social world drawing us to help others and stopping us from hurting others.

Wright acknowledges that autism can impair empathy.

Defence: And people with autism are not like unfeeling psychopaths.

Wright: Can assume its true but hard to point to neurological differences. Does think it's qualitatively different but not totally different.

Looking at a Meloy article (confusingly sounds the same as the judge's name Molloy). It's about classifying mass murders. "Family annihilators, classroom avengers, criminal opportunists, bifurcated killers and miscellaneous."

Now looking at a list of characteristics of adolescent mass murderers. The reference to Avengers that Wright made in his exam-in-chief makes more sense now, a reference to this way of classifying school shooters.

Defence points out the article says the sample size is really small (only four fell into the classroom avenger subgroup). Article says there are limitations and it's only descriptive.

Defence says "violent fantasies" about shootings is not on the list of characteristics. Being a victim of bullying is on the list was present in 10 of 34 cases.

Taking a ten-minute break.

We are back. Defence suggests Minassian had an "abormal intensity and focus" on the incel groups. Wright said what was abnormal was Minassian was about to keep his interest there to himself. Not intrusive or overpowering.

Defence: Video games so distorted his thinking that he got fired from a job.

Wright: More complex. He would finish his work quickly and played video games instead. Did procrastinate. Part of it is what you are talking about. Mixed factors.

Defence: You talk to your colleagues right. About kids, vacations, non-work things. Something neurotypical people engage in quite routinely. It happens innately.

Wright: We can navigate it more easily. Not sure being good at small talk is automatic.

Defence: You know Minassian would finish his work in two hours and spend the rest of the time staring at his monitor waiting for his day to end. Then he began playing video games.

He got five warnings to stop doing it but kept doing it and then got fired. Someone neurotypical would pick up on the fact his co-workers wouldn't find it socially acceptable to see him playing games.

Wright agrees.

Defence: This is example of mind-blindness.

Wright agrees.

(Mind-blindness referring to not seeing the perspectives of other people).

Defence: We can simulate being blind or hearing-impaired, to a certain extent. But we have no way to understand what it's like not to understand people's emotions.

Wright: We can't. Helpful to talk to someone more high-functioning who can describe that, that is our source

Defence: You said his ASD hasn't stopped him from mastering most tasks of adult living, other than feeling socially accepted and finding a intimate partner.

Defence asks about the example of Minassian being unable to order food from a female waitress. What tells you he has mastered that.

Wright says he doesn't have direct evidence of that. But he got a degree, job, into the military. Way behind on social life but accomplishing a lot

Wright says master might be too strong a word.

Defence: He's mastered time management?

Wright: In terms of what?

Defence: Pretty important part of adult living.

Wright: I mean he had a driving licence, credit card.

Defence: What about travelling on a trip without his parents?

Wright: I don't know if he wanted to do that.

Defence: What about renting an apartment or living by himself?

Wright: No

Defence: What about cooking.

Wright doesn't know.

Defence: What about having non-romantic dinner with opposite sex.

Wright says he hasn't done that.

Defence: What about holding down a job for more than a few months. He didn't master the military. Other than passing courses, not mastering much of ordinary adult life

Wright said he has maintained some friendships.

No reason he couldn't have friendships with "like-minded males" with ASD.

Defence: Did you see anything in the texts where he asks about the feelings of the other person.

Wright said not but he's talking to like-minded males

Defence: Anything thats not about shared interest

Wright: He does talk about some things, not acting strange around women

Defence: He's just describing himself to other people.

Wright: Yes.

That concludes cross-examination.

Crown is reading out about an two months before incident. Minassian placed his own order to a female waitress who asked them to be patient bc it was her first day on the job. Minassian told her "you are doing great for your first day on the job." His parents called it a "miracle"

(I think that was from his parents interview with Dr. Westphal)

Wright says there are so many disorders that can interfere with empathy but not the ability to know something is wrong. "To me it's not relevant."

That's the end of re-examination by the Crown.

Judge wants a "candid" discussion about timing at some point. The trial is not set to go past the end of next week but if the Crown psychiatrist testimony time is anything like Dr. Westphal's. then it's going to be tight.

We are going to start now with the Crown's forensic psychiatrist, Dr. Scott Woodside. Very well known to the court, based at CAMH also I believe. But now the Crown is having mic trouble.

Dr. Woodside is affirmed as a witness and accepted as an expert in forensic psychiatry. He is testifying from some place with what looks like at least three guitars mounted on the wall.

Dr. Woodside was first a lawyer in Ontario and then became a psychiatrist, then a forensic psychiatrist. Has been at CAMH since 1997.

Crown asks if there is a way to be a psychiatrist to be an expert in autism. Woodside there isn't a specific designation, but often a large part of child psychiatry. He wouldn't consider himself an expert but does have experience with people with autism.

He has worked with people in the sexual behaviour clinic with autism spectrum disorder. 20-25 per cent of his practice in this area involves people with ASD and/or intellectual disability.

Three or four of people he sees would be considered high-functioning. For the last 25 years he has also worked on-call at CAMH covering emergencies. That includes a unit with people who have very severe forms of autism and require 24-hour care.

Re the Ontario Review Board, he's had a number of patients in his care with autism spectrum disorder but always with co-morbidities. These are people found not criminally responsible or unfit to stand trial.

He's been involved in hundreds of not criminally responsible assessments at this point. He's done 60 or 70 just for murders at least.

Often times he's asked to review reports and give an opinion on whether it's adequate. If they are not, he may do a further assessment.

Crown asks about any cases where the not criminally responsible finding has been based solely through autism spectrum disorder.

Like the other experts, Woodside is not aware of any.

Woodside said he first determines if a mental disorder is present. That is the first threshold for NCR. Typically this involves a disorder that causes someone to lose touch with reality. Schizophrenia, schizo-affective disorders, other disorders with psychotic features, dementia

Could also be a neurological condition that causes psychotic symptoms.

Then you look at, if there was such a mental disorder, was it active at the time. Has to be a link between the symptoms and what happened. Will find out about what happened at the time. If they were experiencing active symptoms, then move on to the next step of the test.

My story about how this works is here: thestar.com/news/gta/2020/…

Re Section 16, person is not criminally responsible for an act committed while suffering from a mental disorder that rendered them either incapable of appreciating the nature and quality of the act or of knowing that it was wrong.

To figure this out, Woodside would review any reports about the person. Would speak to the person directly. Can take many hours, depends on the person. Then there is a review of collateral information about the offence like police videos, interviews, camera surveillance

witness statements. Pretty much what you'd expect to find in police investigation records. Particularly important are interviews done with the accused close in time to the offence, helpful in detecting things like psychosis. (We have such a video in this case)

Also wants to if witnesses saw anything indicating mental illness. Family members or intimate partners may have key information about how the person was acting before and sometimes after the offence. Will also get a psychologist to do testing.

Testing can provide additional helpful insight, but also into how they approach test-taking. They can assist with knowing if someone approaches a test in a forthright fashion, or under/overestimates symptoms. Screen for malingering.

Gets at if you can accept what the person tells you at face value. Any forensic psychiatrist must approach a case with both an open mind but also some degree of skepticism. That's how he approached Minassian's case.

His report (which, yes, I don't have as with all the reports) is dated June 9, 2020.

He reviewed a bunch of stuff, including Minassian's school records and some assignments, witness statements from two people who interviewed minassian for a job, a van rental employee and a friend. Also the police officers who encountered Minassian immediately.

Also reviewed the Elliot Rodger manifesto, report and notes of Dr. Chauhan, Dr. Mamak, Dr. Bradford, and a social worker with that team. Read the report but not notes of Dr. Wright, read report of social worker.

After his report he got the notes of Dr. Westphal et al and their report. Also got the audio of the family/audio/video of Minassian interviews with Westphal et al.

He also got some Facebook and text messages.

Woodside said he approaches cases where he is not the first assessor in different ways. Sometimes he has no information. But usually he does read over reports, to cue him to areas he wants to focus on or areas of interest to examine more fully. Value in both approaches.

He asked Dr. Wright to assess Minassian and look for other co-morbidities. He got the social worker to talk to family and friends (ended up just being family members). Woodside did not directly speak to Minassian's parents.

He interviewed Minassian 4 times in 2019: Oct. 24, 25, Nov 14 ,Nov 21 for about 11 and 3/4 hours.

He types all his notes. His parents insisted he take a touch-typing course before university back in the day. Has come in handy. He prefers typing.

He does include quotes, often has the person repeat back the quote to make sure it's right.

(It is bonkers to me that that these experts don't tape these interviews when we are literally parsing every single word of some of these quotes).

He made a 98 page chronological summary thing of the collateral information.

Woodside says Minassian has a well-established diagnosis of pervasive developmental disorder (now would be part of autism spectrum disorder) at an early age and got a lot of support/intervention at a young age plus some treatment for Tourette's syndrome.

Woodside has been listening to the testimony of the experts over the past several days. He says he's going to be careful to properly attribute what Minassian said to the source of that information, but it may be a little tricky given the volume we've heard.

Woodside going through Minassian's academic history. He got a 70 average, did get accomodations for exams. Was suspended once in grade 3 for swearing. Was teased in school. Would do silly voices so people would make fun of that instead. Also wanted attention.

He thought "negative attention was better than no attention at all." Could distinguish positive and negative attention.

He then went to Seneca College after a break for work and military. He said he didn't have issues at Seneca. He described the other software developers as "nerdy" and fit in better with them. No negative feelings towards other people. Did better academically in college.

Woodside didn't hear Minassian's dad testify. Crown asks about his testimony that he helped Minassian with his school work. Woodside asks how much help he got. Was it looking over work or doing it for him or offering advice.

He did a co-op through Seneca for a year. Doing software/coding. It was in 2013 to 2014. No social interaction. He did quality assurance work for a pension company. Boring but no complaints. His first full time gig was doing qa for another company. Have heard he was fired

for playing video games at work. Would got his work done in two hour and have nothing else do to. He'd play Runescape in what he saw as his "free time."

Justice Molloy observes that much of the background which is in the report (which will be filed at the end of this trial) has been heard before at this point. Suggests we get to the heart of things.

Crown asks if there was anything Minassian told him about women that's different from what he told other assessors.

Woodside said he described approaching a woman in the library, he said they went for a walk later.

He said he asked out two other women and was rejected both times. Woodside asked about stalking behaviour or inappropriate behaviour. The only thing he did was Google the first woman's name. He described his sexual interests which were normal for a 25-year-old man.

He was shy and had trouble initiating conversations. Was going on websites like r/ForeverAlone which described women negatively (slutty, only want rich, hot men) to make him feel better. Made him forget it takes effort on his part to have a relationship.

He denied having strong feelings of anger or hatred towards women. He described "being annoyed with women but not having a full fledged rage," Woodside said. He enjoyed reading the negative comments about women. A relief to have an explanation for why they wouldn't have a

relationship with him. Said the people who short-changed him were being put down. Was aware the comments were "hate-filled and mean." He didn't he'd been seen as misogynistic or not misogynistic. Hadn't thought about it.

When asked, he said if he had gotten into a relationship with a woman and it was going well, he might not have gone through with the attack but if he lost his job or it wasn't going well, he would have likely gone through it.

He was intermittently think about doing a school shooting or mass killing for so long it would feel like he was backing out or quitting or like he "didn't have the courage to do it."

He said re long-term goals, he will be in prison in ten years. Also expected to not be have been released from a hospital by then if that's where he ended up.

Crown now talking about the school shooter/mass murder fantasies. Minassian told Woodside he'd been thinking intermittently about doing one since high school though no plans to actually complete on at that time. Was reading about them.

He said it would have "certain results" including media attention and Wikipedia. He agreed with suggestion that desire for attention and fame was part of it. He talked about being teased or verbally bullied. He said he did still have friends but thought about school shooting

as a way to get revenge on bullies. Also said he would have wanted a high "body count" and referenced a website (Encyclopedia Dramatica) that ranks school shooters in this way.

He said he would have killed indiscriminately. He also said he didn't know how to get a gun legally or illegally. He was focused on other things like college and took his mind off it with video games. He didn't think violent video games had any link to his fantasies.

He said the thoughts "mellowed down" in college. No more bullying, not at school all day and found the coursework less stressful. Still had the fantasies every 2 months or so, but not every two to four weeks like in high school. Talked about a fresh start in college, more social.

Part of his interest in the military was learning about "cool stuff" like weapons but never linked it to school shooting prep. He also described the military as another fresh start. He had failed some courses at Seneca and didn't think he'd get another job after he'd been fired

He started reading about Elliot Rodger in the winter and spring of 2019. Regret not asking him how many times and how often he read it. He said he read it several times.

Woodside asked Minassian where he got the idea for a vehicle. He said he saw something similar in Europe around Jan 2018 -- "vehicle ramming incidents." He decided if he'd do a mass killing he'd do it that way.

He thought it would be difficult to get a gun.

He was reading about other guys complaining about not getting girlfriends, as well as about Rodger and the manifesto. He also had a new job starting and was worried if he messed it up he'd be unemployed forever. Before that he wanted to get notoriety.

He didn't want to go through another two-week period where he disappointed his parents (like when he got fired). He didn't think he could rent a truck if he didn't have a job. He thought if he got fired he wouldn't be able to use a rental truck to kill people.

In addition to avoiding "awkward encounters at work" he spoke about loneliness and interest in other mass killing.

He told others he was seeking noteriety from fringe groups online, but for Woodside it was "no such thing as bad publicity." He wanted media attention. He wanted to be remembered forever. Didn't get impression he cared who'd talk about him as long as they remembered his name.

He wanted to ensure his name lived on. "This trial is a good example of that unfortunately. If he contemplated living, this is the kind of publicity he might have thought about."

He said he intended to die, to force police to kill him to avoid prison. He was also feeling sad and lonely. Could be taken as some type of suicide attempt but didn't speak of it that way.

He thought people affected would think he was "despicable" and that most people would think mass shootings are "senseless" and no one would have sympathy for his problems or the problems of mass shooters.

He said most people would see his acts as unjustifiable and morally wrong, but might be celebrated in fringe groups or joked about. Woodside said "unjustifiable" and "morally wrong" are not in quotes in his report but he thinks those are Minassian's words.

He's made comments about not wanting to "rot in obscurity" which is a reference to Elliot Rodger. He said he didn't see much in his future. Didn't think he'd be successful at work. Wouldn't be remembered in any way. Did say the incel ideology appealed to him but didn't adopt it

He understood the narrative in those forums wasn't accurate. He used the incel ideology to force himself into that mindset, to help him complete committing this act. "I was thinking negatively on purpose just to make myself do it." Used to "rev" him up.

He also said he wanted to want to do it. Wanted to block out other thoughts that might constrain him. Compartmentalizing is a common human thing. Put blinders on. Can do it quite purposefully.

It is something with sex offenders and pedophiles, average men from all walks of life, but a strong preference for sexual contact with children. They know and can appreciate the harm but are able to compartmentalize or rationalize their behaviour bc it's something they want to do

It is not an uncommon behaviour for humans to focus on things they want to do, and block out potential negative consequences.

Crown: Related to his autism in any way?

Woodside: Doesn't have to be.

Woodside: Nothing about mass murder being more appealing to someone with autism spectrum disorder than any one else. Don't really know what attracts people to that idea or fantasy. Some things might make sense like revenge on bullies. But people have wide interests.

True crime novels are eagerly sought out by large sections of our population. For most that fascination is not in wanting to do those things themselves. In Minassian's case it became something he really wanted to do himself. Not really to do with ASD.

Woodside would call him a mass murderer who HAPPENS to have autism spectrum disorder rather than someone whose autism spectrum disorder caused him to be a mass murderer.

Minassian explained his choice of words in his Facebook post as very deliberate. He included 4chan, incel and Rodger reference. He posted it on Facebook, not 4chan. For the world at large to read it, not for fringe groups.

Minassian said he never thought to leave a note for his parents, more about killing people than suicide. He knew they'd be disappointed but "I wanted to do it so badly anyway... I had nothing if I didn't do it."

If he were dead he wouldn't have to put in any effort any more. Never thought about what would happen if he didn't do it. He was a little sad about not having a girlfriend but "not so crippling" he couldn't function.

He said most people would say the correct thing would be to put him prison. He didn't think he was mentally ill, but thought if he was mentally ill at the time he would not have known. Woodside says this is pretty insightful bc this is often the case for people with psychosis

Minassian was "acutely aware" of his limitations, a burden of having high intellect. He was entirely capable of and did read about autism and knew at significant level what his deficits were and how they were affecting him. Never thought of marriage and children.

But wouldn't have been surprised if he had thought about it, or that his life trajectory might be different than for someone without autism.

That is it for the day.

We are talking about scheduling but on an interesting tangent about whether autism spectrum disorder qualifies as a mental disorder under section 16. The real issue is whether as it manifests for Minassian is qualifies.

The judge says there are absolutely people with severe autism spectrum disorder who would qualify and indeed could be found not criminally responsible. Crown says the focus is on the morally wrong part but does want to argue the threshold issue for Minassian specifically.

(To be clear, it's not an issue that autism spectrum disorder in general qualifies under Section 16 but the Crown isn't sure Minassian's level of autism qualifies and wants to argue the point)