However, when a defendant who is alleged to have committed a violent crime attempts to argue an NCRMD defense, the case is often highly publicized. This spring, the trial of Alek Minassian finished in Toronto. Minassian was accused of killing 10 people and injuring 16 others by driving a moving van onto busy sidewalks in the downtown Toronto area.

Whether or not Minassian actually committed the crime was not at issue in the trial not only did Minassian admit to being the perpetrator, but he also admitted that the attack was pre-meditated and that he had intended to kill the victims. Instead, the main issue at trial was whether or not Minassian should be held criminally responsible for his actions.

As you know, an individual cannot be held responsible for a criminal act if they suffer from a mental disorder that renders them incapable of appreciating the nature and quality of a particular act or of knowing that it was wrong. Normally, defendants who receive NCRMD verdicts tend to suffer from disorders or illnesses that involve severe psychosis (e.g., schizophrenia). In this case, however, the diagnosis that was used to support the NCRMD defense was autism spectrum disorder.

According to Autism Canada, people with autism may find it hard to connect with others, sometimes have difficulty communicating, repeat certain patterns of behaviour, and show interest in a limited number of activities. In this case, it was argued that a pattern of 'autistic thinking' exhibited by Minassian contributed to an impairment in understanding that what he was doing was wrong. A psychiatrist hired by the defense argued that although Minassian does not suffer from psychosis, his autistic way of thinking is severely distorted in a similar manner to psychosis.

Moreover, the defense also argued that Minassian's manner of thinking left him susceptible to belief in extremist ideologies and to 'brainwashing' by extremist groups including the 'incel' movement (i.e., fringe misogynist ideology of "involuntarily celibate" men who have difficulty attracting sexual interest from women). For instance, Minassian told detectives that the attack was retribution against society due to rejection and ridicule he experienced from women, and also posted on Facebook about how the "incel rebellion has already begun".

The defense argued that "Mr. Minassian did not understand wrongfulness in a way that enabled him to apply that understanding in a rational way", and that "Minassian lacked the capacity to rationally decide whether the act was right or wrong and, hence, could not make a rational decision as to whether or not to do it". Conversely, experts hired by the Crown suggested that the fact that he planned the attack goes against the NCRMD defense because it shows he could appreciate the nature of his actions.

On March 3, 2021, Alex Minassian was found guilty of 10 counts of first-degree murder and 16 counts of attempted murder. In rendering this verdict, the judge in this case decided that Minassian was criminally responsible for his actions.

Based on what you learned in this week's lecture about determining whether someone can be considered NCRMD, what do you think about this verdict? Do you agree with the judge? Use the criteria outlined in the R-CRAS to help guide your discussion, and feel free to consult the media for more information on the case. How do you think that this verdict was received by community members, the victims' families, mental health advocates, and autism organizations?