London attack: trial of the accused
View full file
The report documents similar comments made by the accused in November 2022.
The initial objective of this psychiatric evaluation was to determine whether a defense of not criminal responsibility for mental disorder could have been filed. The psychiatrist concluded that the accused did not meet the criteria for such a defense.
The 22-year-old man was not questioned about the reasons which led him to file a different plea at the opening of the trial.
He has pleaded not guilty to four charges of premeditated murder in circumstances of terrorism against him and to charges of attempted murder in connection with serious injuries suffered by another family member during the collision.
During the 10-week trial of the man accused of the premeditated terrorist murder of 4 members of a Muslim family in London in June 2021, the jurors withdrew, at the judge's request, on around fifteen occasions.
Section 648.1 of the Criminal Code of Canada
No information concerning a phase of the trial taking place in the absence of the jury may be published or broadcast in any way whatsoever before before the jury retires to deliberate.
This normal procedure allows lawyers to debate disputed legal issues, such as the admissibility of certain evidence, without this influencing the jurors.
The jury heard that the accused traveled to Toronto, wearing a bulletproof jacket and helmet, in the days before the facts with which he is accused. However, the judge did not allow certain details of this trip to be admitted into evidence because these elements could have prejudiced the defense.
The accused had brought with him a list of a dozen abortion clinics as well as directions to one of these clinics, located at
Women's College Hospital .
In his report, the psychiatrist states that the accused considered his escapade to Toronto as a reconnaissance trip.
It also states that the defendant's concerns about abortion began as a teenager after he attended a conference at the controversial Redeemer University, a private university, at age 13. religious.
During this event, viewing videos showing aborted fetuses would have aroused intense rage in him to the point where he would have asked his mother whether it was appropriate to attack an abortion clinic. To which his mother would have replied that he should discuss it with his pastor.
Open in full screen mode
Nathaniel Veltman was the first witness called to the stand by the defense at his murder trial. (File photo)
The accused affirmed during his testimony that he does not have any relationship with his mother today. He considers her a fanatic and never felt love from her.
In addition, he refused to allow his mother to be contacted by the psychiatrist to collaborate in the psychiatric evaluation.
Portions of the accused's interrogations in the hours following his arrest were also considered inadmissible.
During these parts of the interrogations which were not presented to the jurors, the accused made, among other things, derogatory remarks about black people, members of the LGBT community, trans people and the vaccination campaign against COVID-19.
The man, then aged 20, claimed to have periodically entertained the idea of carrying out terrorist acts since the adolescence.
Subscribe to the ICI Ontario newsletter.
Form to subscribe to the Ontario newsletter.Subscribe
If the decisions of whether or not to file certain evidence was taken jointly between the defense and the Crown, others were the subject of debate. In such cases, these elements were subject to decisions by Magistrate Renee Pomerance.
The Crown has twice requested that the testimony of defense expert Julian Gojer, in whole or in part, be ruled inadmissible.
The Crown prosecutor argued in particular that the withdrawal effects of hallucinogens described by the doctor were hypotheses and not peer-reviewed scientific studies. Jennifer Moser called it all bogus science.
The judge, however, maintained, in the two hearings without jurors, the admissibility of the expert's testimony with certain restrictions.
The court must take precautions before eliminating testimony, said the judge, particularly when it concerns a defense witness, to submit to the principle according to which we want to avoid an innocent person being charged.
Open full screen
Psychiatrist Julian Gojer testified at the trial of Nathaniel Veltman. (File photo)
A request from the Crown to present a full video of the impact that claimed the lives of four members of the Afzaal family was also ultimately abandoned.
Twelve members of the jury retired to deliberate, but at the start of the trial last September, 14 people were selected to ensure that enough would remain in place for the duration of this trial. One juror was excused during the trial after testing positive for COVID-19.
The defense then requested that the entire jury be placed in quarantine or undergo a screening test, which was rejected. Instead, masks were offered to people who wished to wear them in the courtroom.
Then, just before the end of the proceedings, a juror was selected at random then dispensed by the judge.
The deliberations take place behind closed doors.
Katherine Brulotte (View profile)