Five years after stabbing his husband to death in an horrific attack in the bedroom of the couple’s Scarborough apartment, Leahain Malcolm has been found guilty of second-degree murder.
Superior Court Justice Heather McArthur handed down her judgment Thursday that while she accepted that Malcolm had a mental disorder, she was unable to find on a balance of probabilities that Malcolm was incapable of appreciating that stabbing 38-year-old Rupert Brown was morally wrong.
McArthur also found that while it was unclear if Malcolm intended to kill Brown, she was satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt that he intended to cause bodily harm, which he knew was likely to cause death, and was reckless as to whether death ensued.
“This is a challenging case,” she concluded.
It was Feb. 27, 2021 around 3:25 a.m. when 28-year-old Malcolm made a 911 call reporting that he was hearing voices. He said that the voices told him his spouse was a demon.
When asked by the operator, Malcolm agreed that the voices told him his spouse was going to kill him.
Brown sustained 30 sharp force injuries, including two that were fatal. Brown also had defensive wounds and yelled out for help.
Within minutes of stabbing his husband, Malcolm called 911.
The couple met in 2016 in Jamaica and were married in the United States in 2018. Homosexuality is illegal in Jamaica.
In January 2020, Malcolm and Brown came to Canada and claimed asylum based on homophobia in Jamaica.
Brown had trained and worked as a doctor while in Jamaica. After coming to Canada, he did not work in his field while he was awaiting the outcome of his refugee claim.
Malcolm had studied to be a lawyer in Jamaica.
However, he did not pass the bar exam and thus was not called to the Jamaican Bar.
Malcolm obtained a job with the Independent Commission of Investigation, investigating allegations of police wrongdoing.
After coming to Canada, Malcolm applied to be a lawyer here. In January 2021, the Law Society of Ontario denied his accreditation.
The defence argued at the judge-alone trial that began last June that Malcolm should be found not criminally responsible (NCR) because at the time of the incident, he was suffering from a mental disorder preventing him from appreciating his actions were morally wrong.
The defence called two forensic psychiatrists, Dr. Lisa Ramshaw and Dr. Derek Pallandi, who suggested that Malcolm was NCR because he was likely experiencing psychotic symptoms at the time.
Crown prosecutors argued that Malcolm had a mental illness but was not actively psychotic at the time of the incident and had the capacity to understand his actions were morally wrong.
Get daily National news
Get daily Canada news delivered to your inbox so you’ll never miss the day’s top stories.
They relied on the expert evidence of forensic psychiatrist Dr. Alina Iosif, who asserted Malcolm did not have a mental disorder at the relevant time.
McArthur noted that Iosif relied heavily on the statement that Malcolm gave police which was ruled inadmissible. She noted that when Malcolm spoke to police, he seemed to be calm and have a good rapport which she found to be inconsistent with psychosis.
“She (Iosif) didn’t explain how to reconcile this view with his documented history that suggested he often seemed calm despite being psychotic,” said McArthur.
The judge noted that on Jan. 28, 2021, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (CAMH) staff said Malcolm was both calm and actively psychotic, and again noted that same behaviour when he was admitted to CAMH on Feb. 10, 2021, two weeks before the stabbing.
The judge said Iosif found Malcolm was “quite frantic” on the 911 call.
“She relied on this to formulate this would be normal behaviour for someone who just killed his husband,” McArthur added. “I found Dr. Iosif’s characterization of how he presents on the 911 call difficult to reconcile.”
McArthur said she agreed with defence who argued Malcolm showed little emotion and was quite flat with the 911 operator.
“She (Dr. Iosif) said he was not psychotic at the time because he told the booking officer ‘he was not in crisis’. But Dr. Iosif was wrong. He said the opposite. When asked if he was in crisis, he said ‘Probably. Yes.’”
McArthur also noted that Malcolm reported that he could speak back to the voices in his head, but Iosif said that was impossible telling court, “one can’t speak back to voices.” Yet, McArthur said in cross-examination, Iosif agreed someone hearing a voice may have a conversation with the voice. “I found the fact she said someone couldn’t speak to voices puzzling,” McArthur said.
Iosif testified she did not believe Malcolm had a major mental disorder at the time of the stabbing or that he was depressed. “I took it from Dr. Iosif’s evidence that low mood and depression were equivalent.”
McArthur said records showed that Malcolm had low moods in the month prior to the offence, including when he was admitted to CAMH on Jan. 28, 2021, and again on Feb. 10, 2021.
“When shown this information, Dr. Iosif replied, ‘So the examples you showed me actually show me low mood. Low mood is not the same as depression.’ I was surprised when Dr. Iosif said this,” McArthur said.
“Her evidence seemed inconsistent with her evidence in chief where she seemed to equate low mood and depression.”
McArthur noted that the defence also showed Iosif a record from CAMH in January 2021 when Brown reported to CAMH staff that Malcolm was depressed.
Defence said specifically that Mr. Brown was depressed, not that he had a low mood. Iosif responded that Brown was not a psychiatrist.
When defence counsel highlighted that Mr. Brown was a doctor, Iosif replied, “Just because another doctor says someone is depressed, doesn’t mean that someone is depressed.”
“I was troubled by Dr. Iosif’s testimony in this area. She seemed to be trying to joust with counsel, rather than answering the questions in a fair and objective way. She came across as intransigent. Her refusal to revisit or reconsider her conclusion that Mr. Malcolm was not depressed, despite being provided information that suggested he may have been, was concerning,” said the judge.
“Sufficed to say, given her reliance on hearsay, I am not prepared to rely on her opinion,” McArthur concluded.
McArthur said both defence psychiatrists, who relied on comments of the accused in his interview with police and his self-reporting, came to the conclusion he was actively psychotic at the time.
She said the psychiatrist relied on hearsay and information that was not heard at trial, which lessen the weight of their opinions.
The judge noted defence experts relied on CAMH records from January and February 2021 when it seemed clear Malcolm was suffering from a psychotic episode at the time.
“The CAMH records shine some light on his unstable mental health at the time proximate to the stabbing,” the judge said, noting he was given an injectable medication.
Ramshaw testified injectables don’t work for everyone and a change in medication can cause a change in symptoms and can be a risk factor for psychosis.
Malcolm did not testify at trial. “I have no evidence from him as to why he killed his husband, as to what he was thinking or experiencing at the time. Anything he told the experts is inadmissible heresay,” said McArthur.
During a police interview which was ruled inadmissible, Malcolm told police that because of assault allegations just a month before the stabbing, he was not supposed to be with Brown. However, he returned to the apartment a few days before the stabbing. Malcolm said he had been feeling up and down and was depressed, was worried and extremely anxious.
Malcolm told police he and Brown got into a verbal argument which turned physical.
He said when he went to bed, he began hearing voices.
The voices were telling him that Brown was going to kill him. The voices were “loud” and “inside his head.” He said the voices said that Brown was “evil” and that he was going to kill Malcolm.
The judge noted the psychiatrists were able to rely on information that did not form part of the evidence.
“Ultimately, when I consider the extent of the inadmissible evidence relied upon by both experts, I can place little weight on their opinions. Their task was to sift and sort through all the information. My task is to determine what information is admissible.”
The judge said she was persuaded that Malcolm was suffering from delusions at the time he stabbed Brown after “looking at the totality of the evidence.” On the issue of whether Malcolm had the capacity to understand the moral wrongfulness of his actions, she said there was sparse evidence other than the 911 call.
“It is distinctly possible he did not appreciate that stabbing his husband was morally wrong. I have no doubt, as the experts said, but for the mental health issues he was struggling with at the time, the stabbing would not have occurred,” McArthur said.
She noted having mental health issues is not the test to establish someone is NCR.
A date for a sentencing hearing has yet to be set.
Malcolm faces deportation upon the completion of his sentence.
