This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.

features does not diminish that conclusion. The offender's crime falls at the top of any notional range of objective gravity for the crime of murder.

Are there features that might ameliorate the offender's crime?

89 There is nothing in the evidence that can reduce the offender's moral turpitude or mitigate the gravity of this crime.

90 There is some evidence that might suggest that the offender has a mental illness, but it is highly unsatisfactory, and, on balance, the Court can conclude no more than that the offender has reported symptoms of mental illness over a number of years and been prescribed medications typically used to treat psychosis. On the evidence before the Court, it cannot be concluded, even on balance, that his claims of having been diagnosed with schizophrenia are true. The only psychiatric evidence before the Court are the two reports of Dr Nielssen. Those reports are themselves somewhat unsatisfactory, since the second report was evidently produced in part by copying the earlier report, including as to the history given by the offender, without acknowledging the quoted content. Even setting that aside, Dr Nielssen did not himself diagnose a schizophrenic illness when he assessed the offender earlier this month; the most that he could say, on the basis of the offender's self-report, was that he had a substance related psychotic illness. Psychosis brought on by self-induced drug intoxication cannot mitigate sentence.

91 The document review undertaken by Dr Nielssen did not record any past diagnosis of schizophrenia having been made by any doctor at any time but, rather, the offender's reports of such a diagnosis having been made. The offender has been treated with anti-psychotic medications, but seemingly the basis of prescriptions of that nature being given to him have been his own claims of hearing voices. The only independent record of any health professional having observed behaviour consistent with psychosis comes from an ambulance officer who attended the offender on 14 January 2022 at Penrith Police Station and took him to Nepean Hospital. A note records the offender as appearing to speak to people in his cell when no other person was present.

92 The Court is very suspicious of any ostensibly psychotic presentation by the offender at that time given that nothing similar has been previously observed