Repeatedly not criminally responsible

On March 27, 2023, Isaac Brouillard Lessard stabbed two police officers who came to arrest him at his home in Louiseville. The man suffering from schizoaffective disorder is shot and Officer Maureen Breau succumbs to her injuries. Three days earlier, his parents, worried about his condition and convinced that he was in psychosis, had nevertheless alerted the police. An investigation of Duty reveals that one in four people whose criminal record resulted in a verdict of not criminally responsible was already known to the commission responsible for monitoring this population because of their violent history. Isaac Brouillard Lessard is one of them.

“I can tell you that his father and I wondered if they were waiting for a tragedy to occur, but we never would have imagined that the drama would be as big as that,” confides in an interview with The duty Sandra Lessard, mother of the 35-year-old man.

The story of Isaac Brouillard Lessard is symptomatic of a systemic problem, according to the analysis we have carried out.

Before committing the irreparable, Isaac Brouillard Lessard had been declared not criminally responsible (NCR) five times since 2013, for death threats against members of his family and assault on members of the healthcare staff. The parents are categorical: the tragedy which cost the lives of their son and a Sûreté du Québec officer, in addition to injuring a patrol officer, could have been avoided.

Sandra Lessard’s hopes of finding the “real Isaac” faded in February 2022.

Like all people who received a verdict of not criminally responsible, Isaac Brouillard Lessard was followed by the Commission for the Examination of Mental Disorders (CETM). During each hearing, this division of the Administrative Tribunal of Quebec is responsible for determining whether the person represents, because of their mental state, a significant risk to public safety. Then she must meet her social needs by allowing her social reintegration. At the end of a hearing where the attending physician or psychiatrist testifies, the Commission decides whether the person should be “detained” in a hospital to receive psychiatric care or rather released unconditionally or under conditions.

“I don’t want to blame a single person, because unfortunately, we are not organized as a society to properly manage mental illness, but I still think that the Commission did not do its job. job. She was the one who had the power to do something,” denounces M.me Lessard, who helplessly saw her son being released on conditions during his last visit to the CETM.

“It seems to me that when you have an aggressive, arrogant, stressed and nervous person, you see that you have to intervene. And when I knew he was returning home, a chill went through my body. As parents, we were just waiting for that, we told ourselves that if he was taken care of, taken to the hospital and we made sure that he was medicated, he would get better,” confides the mother of Isaac Brouillard Lessard.

“When he was in care, Isaac was doing very well and he was a truly wonderful person,” she adds.

Dramas that multiply

Isaac Brouillard Lessard is not the only NCR defendant to have made headlines in recent months. Last February, Fabio Puglisi, who was released unconditionally by the CETM in 2019, allegedly killed his mother and a neighbor in Vaudreuil-Dorion.

“In recent years, there have been a lot of tragedies in Quebec involving people who had already gone through the CETM,” indicates the Dr Mathieu Dufour, head of the psychiatry department of the National Institute of Forensic Psychiatry Philippe-Pinel. “It is an increase in the number of events which is abnormal. »

The duty analyzed all decisions rendered in 2023 by the CETM. Conclusion: the cases of Isaac Brouillard Lessard and Fabio Puglisi are not isolated cases. Our investigation shows that 89 of the 371 hearings (24%) held by the Commission following a criminal charge resulting in a verdict of not criminally responsible concerned individuals who had already received a similar verdict in the past.

“I find it high,” laments Professor Anne Crocker, noting the data from the Duty. The woman who today occupies the position of director of research and university teaching at the National Institute of Forensic Psychiatry Philippe-Pinel had carried out a similar exercise in 2015. She had revealed, through a vast study published in the Canadian Journal of Psychiatrythat 8% of patients under CETM had already received a verdict of not criminally responsible.

“It’s really a significant increase in the use of the not criminally responsible finding.” Which makes me say that we still use it too much as an alternative to usual care. For me, it is a lack of mental health resources more than a problem of surveillance,” she adds.

Released unconditionally

According to the compilation of Duty, 73% of NCR repeat offenders were able to return to their lives without monitoring requirements after being released unconditionally in 2023 by the Commission, which judged that they no longer posed a significant risk to public safety.

Liliane Hubert’s general psychiatrist was not able to convince the Commission of the risk posed by his patient, suffering from schizophrenia. Mme Hubert also fell through the cracks of the net supposed to protect the public. Accused of making death threats to a woman in 2018, she was declared NCR and released unconditionally, but ended up stabbing her boyfriend to death three years later in an apartment in Limoilou. Her psychiatrist, however, recommended that she be followed to prevent her from relapsing. “Despite the notable improvement of the accused over the last year, she remains at risk for public safety due to her history as a drug user,” argued her psychiatrist, who recommended that the CETM take evidence of caution and to release her, but under conditions.

“The Commission understands the cautious recommendation of Dr Rousseau, who wanted to protect society and wanted to see the accused evolve over a longer period in order to recommend conditional release. However, from the evidence presented and the very testimony of Dr Rousseau, the Commission can only note that the accused no longer represents, due to her mental state, a significant risk to public safety. Certainly a risk remains, but this risk is, on the day of the hearing, only hypothetical. She must therefore be released unconditionally,” concludes the CETM in a decision rendered in January 2020.

But what do we mean by “dangerousness”? And above all, who determines that an NCR person represents a risk to themselves or others?

Psychiatrist Mathieu Dufour recalls that according to Canadian jurisprudence, a person declared NCR is presumed not to be dangerous. The treating psychiatrist must therefore be able to prove to the Commission that his patient is dangerous. “Otherwise, the patient is presumed not dangerous, and then he or she must be released. This is the entire basis of our current legal psychiatry system. »

“You don’t just have to prove that the patient is going to get sick again. We have to show that he is going to be sick, then that there will be violence. Often, it’s easy to say: someone who has no self-criticism, without legal constraints, will stop taking medication and therefore become psychotic. This what we must remember is that we do not have a crystal ball to be 100% sure in our criterion whether he will become violent,” specifies the Dr Dufour, who emphasizes the importance of using specialized dangerousness assessment tools.

Sandra Lessard is categorical: compulsory medication would have saved the lives of her son and Sergeant Maureen Breau. “If you want it to stop a little quickly, all these dramas: compulsory medication, and make sure they take them [leurs médicaments]. It’s simple like that. After that, you will have time to create new programs or put the budget elsewhere. »

To watch on video


source site-39