Crown v Accused

2 In the morning of 2 January 2024, the accused attended his mother's address in Moorabbin in Melbourne's south‑eastern suburbs. The accused broke the front window of the house in order to gain entry.

3 At approximately 9:45am, the accused's mother, ST, and brothers, LT and CT, arrived home and observed the damage to the front window. ST called the police. Believing the house to be empty, CT entered and found the accused in his bedroom. The accused repeatedly punched CT in the face and proceeded to chase CT out of the house. The accused encountered LT outside and repeatedly punched him to the face. The accused then ran away before returning with a spade and chasing LT. LT ran into the house and shut the door behind him, and the accused repeatedly struck the front door with the spade. The accused proceeded to approach ST and struck her to the head and shoulder with the spade, causing the handle to break. The accused then left the property on foot.

4 At 10:22am, CCTV cameras recorded the accused walking past Linton Street, Moorabbin, towards Barilla Road. The accused was wearing a white‑coloured Adidas jumper, light blue tracksuit pants, and no shoes.

5 At approximately 10:53am, the accused entered the Big W store at Southland shopping centre on Nepean Highway in Cheltenham and stole a pair of brown 'Mambo' brand slides.

6 At 11:01am, the accused entered the Woolworths store at Southland shopping centre and walked directly to aisle seven from which he obtained a 'Mint' branded knife in packaging from the shelf and placed it in the waistband of his pants. The accused covered the knife with his jumper before leaving the store.

7 The accused continued to walk throughout the shopping centre before exiting onto Nepean Highway. Once outside, he took the knife from his waistband, removed it from its packaging, and tucked the blade back into his waistband. The accused then removed the knife from his waistband with his right hand and walked across Nepean Highway wielding the knife and slashing at the air.

8 At 11:28am, he boarded a city‑bound train at Southland Railway Station and alighted the train at Moorabbin Railway Station at 11:32am. The accused proceeded to walk across Station Street in the direction of the Woolworths store on Taylor Street in Moorabbin.

9 At approximately 11:36am, the accused entered the Woolworths store and stole an orange soft drink before proceeding south along Nepean Highway.

10 At approximately 12:00pm, Mr Triandafilidis left his home address with the intention of catching public transport to Southland shopping centre as per his usual routine.

11 At 12:05pm, the accused walked west along Dane Road in Hampton East, and CCTV footage captures him wielding the knife whilst he continued to walk west towards Mr Triandafilidis' location. At 12:14pm, the accused was captured near the corner of Thorburn Street and Bluff Road, and appeared to cross Thorburn Street in a northerly direction towards the bus stops on Bluff Road and Widdop Crescent.

12 At 12:16pm, CCTV footage captures the accused crossing Saltair Street and entering Widdop Crescent. Between 12:16pm and 12:23pm, Mr Triandafilidis walked into Widdop Crescent where he was confronted by the accused and stabbed twice. There is no CCTV footage of the stabbing.

13 Police arrived at the scene at approximately 12:40pm after a witness called triple zero and advised that there was a male lying on the road and bleeding from the chest.

14 Paramedics attended the scene to provide medical assistance, however they were unable to save Mr Triandafilidis and he was pronounced dead at 12:52pm.

15 An autopsy was conducted on 3 January 2024 by Dr Judith Fronczek, a forensic pathologist at the Victorian Institute of Forensic Medicine. The autopsy identified two stab wounds to Mr Triandafilidis' abdomen with perforations of both liver lobes, including vascular structures, the right kidney, and the right renal vein. The wounds had a length of approximately 5 cm and a minimum depth of approximately 2 cm. Dr Fronczek opined that the cause of death was these two stab wounds to the abdomen. A linear abrasion was also identified on Mr Triandafilidis' left shoulder.

16 At 12:23pm, the accused was captured on CCTV footage walking south on Bluff Road before turning into Wickham Road. He was then seen entering the Coles supermarket on Bluff Road in Hampton, and he exited the store at 12:33pm and stole two drinks.

17 CCTV cameras then show the accused walking along Bay Road and Bluff Road between 12:57pm and 1:06pm before waiting for the bus at the Bay Road and Sydenham Road bus stop. At 1:06pm, the accused boarded the route 822 bus which travelled in the direction of Southland shopping centre. The accused selected a seat in the middle area of the bus by himself. CCTV cameras capture the accused removing the knife from his pants and holding it up whilst on the bus.

18 At approximately 1:15pm, the accused alighted the bus at Southland shopping centre and walked inside. He moved around the shopping centre, frequently touching and adjusting the knife which was concealed by his jumper. CCTV footage shows the accused making aggressive gestures towards various groups of people inside the shopping centre.

19 At 1:19pm, CCTV cameras capture the accused lifting up his jumper and exposing his waist area, where it is believed he was concealing the knife, and various shoppers stopping and turning to observe the accused. At 1:21pm, the accused exposed his waistband, clearly displaying the knife, and made gestures towards people inside a nail salon. The accused then left the shopping centre and began walking towards Chesterville Road.

20 A report was made to police about the accused's behaviour and police commenced attempting to track the accused down. At 2:14pm, police received a further report about a male waving a knife and yelling at a tree on Biscop Road in Moorabbin.

21 At 2:47pm, police officers Carmel and Rosson arrived at Biscop Road along with various other uniform police units and members from the Critical Incident Response Team. At 2:50pm, the accused exited his family home via the front door and was arrested. No one else was present at the home. The accused was transported to Moorabbin police station.

22 An examination of the accused determined that he was not fit for interview.

23 On 4 January 2024, the accused was charged with the murder of Spiros Triandafilidis.

24 Section 20(1) of the Crimes (Mental Impairment and Unfitness to be Tried) Act 1997 (Vic) ('CMIA') established the defence of mental impairment. Section 20(1) states as follows:

(1) The defence of mental impairment is established for a person charged with an offence if, at the time of engaging in conduct constituting the offence, the person was suffering from a mental impairment that had the effect that -

(a) he or she did not know the nature and quality of the conduct; or

(b) he or she did not know that the conduct was wrong (that is, he or she could not reason with a moderate degree of sense and composure about whether the conduct, as perceived by reasonable people, was wrong).

25 If the defence of mental impairment is established, the person must be found not guilty by reason of mental impairment.[2]

26 The question of mental impairment may be raised at any time during a trial by the defence or, with leave of the trial judge, by the prosecution.[3]

27 If a person is charged with an indictable offence and, before the empanelment of a jury, the prosecution and defence agree that the proposed evidence establishes the defence of mental impairment, as was the case here, the trial judge may hear the evidence and:

(a) if satisfied that the evidence establishes the defence of mental impairment, may direct that a verdict of not guilty because of mental impairment be recorded; or

(b) if not so satisfied, must direct that the person be tried by a jury.[4]

28 A person is presumed not to have been suffering from a mental impairment having the effect as detailed in section 20(1) of the CMIA until the contrary is proved.[5]

29 The question of whether a person was suffering from a mental impairment in the requisite sense is a question of fact, and the onus of rebutting this presumption rests on the party who raises the defence.[6]

30 Upon a finding that a person is not guilty because of mental impairment, the Court must declare that the person is liable to supervision under part 5 of the CMIA, or order that the person be released unconditionally.[7]

31 The Court must take into account the matters set out in section 40(2) of the CMIA prior to ordering unconditional release.[8]

32 If the Court declares a person liable to supervision, the Court must make one of the orders listed in section 24(1) pending the making of a supervision order, including an order remanding a person in custody in an appropriate place or in a prison.[9] Prior to making an order remanding a person in custody in an appropriate place, the Court must have received a certificate under section 47 of the CMIA that the necessary facilities or services are available.[10] The Court must not make an order remanding a person in custody in a prison unless satisfied that there is no practicable alternative in the circumstances.[11]

33 The accused was committed to stand trial on a charge of murder and four charges of theft on 13 September 2024 at the Melbourne Magistrates' Court. The accused pleaded not guilty to these charges.

34 Various preliminary hearings proceeded in this Court in the subsequent weeks. It was indicated to this Court that the parties agreed that a consent mental impairment hearing was necessary in this matter, and such a hearing was formally ordered by Judicial Registrar Tueno on 3 February 2025.

35 The consent mental impairment hearing proceeded before me on 25 March 2025. It was common ground between the parties that a consent mental impairment hearing was the appropriate course in this matter. The Court was invited to review the evidence relied upon with respect to mental impairment, namely, the reports of two forensic psychiatrists who had both examined the accused, and the viva voce evidence of one of these report writers. There being no dispute between the parties and the experts with respect to the availability of the defence of mental impairment, the Court was invited to form its conclusions on the basis of the two reports.

36 Further, the parties were both in agreement that the Court should, if satisfied that the evidence established a defence of mental impairment, direct that a verdict of not guilty because of mental impairment be recorded.

37 A report authored by Dr Prashant Pandurangi dated 12 September 2024 was filed with the Court. Dr Pandurangi is a forensic psychiatrist at the Victorian Institute of Forensic Mental Health ('Forensicare') and Monash Health. Dr Pandurangi was engaged on behalf of the accused to provide an expert opinion with respect to whether the defence of mental impairment was available to him.

38 In preparation of the report, Dr Pandurangi had access to an array of materials, including the brief of evidence, a Forensicare Mental Health Advice and Response Service summary, Forensicare medical records, and Justice Health records. Dr Pandurangi also conducted two interviews with the accused.

39 Dr Pandurangi reports that, according to the accused, his parents separated when he was in his late teens. The accused's father has since re‑partnered and lives overseas, whilst his mother, who has also re‑partnered, resides in Moorabbin and used to work in sales, although the accused was not sure of her exact employment. There is an intervention order in place naming the accused's mother as a protected person and the accused as the respondent. The accused is the third‑oldest in a sibship of seven, and has two biological siblings and four half‑siblings. Dr Pandurangi notes that the collateral information indicates that one of the accused's half‑sisters suffers from bipolar affective disorder and his parents suffered from depression.

40 The accused reported growing up in Wallan, north of Melbourne. He was not aware of any difficulties with respect to his birth or meeting developmental milestones. The accused reported that his father was physically and verbally abusive towards him and his siblings, and that his father would express his anger in an 'unpredictable manner'. The accused further reported that his mother was also physically abusive, and believed that this related to her disapproval of him playing video games at night.

41 The accused attended St Patrick's Primary School in Kilmore and reported having little interest in academics, however, enjoyed playing sports. He did not recall having any behavioural disturbances at school, however, did receive some detentions. The accused attended Wallan Secondary College and remembered frequent suspensions from school due to smoking, causing property damage, and engaging in fights. After he finished Year 10, the accused claims that he was 'kicked out', and his parents decided to move him to Sydney to live with his uncle. He recalls staying with his uncle in Blacktown for approximately a year and then returning to Victoria. Following his return, he attended St Helena Secondary College in Eltham North, however, was expelled the following year. The applicant indicated that he spent the subsequent four years at home and not engaging in any further education or employment.

42 With respect to employment, the accused noted that he worked for approximately two years in a variety of jobs, including landscaping, concreting, and traffic management.

43 The accused reported having a few short‑term intimate relationships, and had one three‑year relationship in his late teens.

44 Regarding drug and alcohol use, the accused indicated to Dr Pandurangi that he first tried cannabis in his early teens and had been using the drug sporadically ever since, however, did not use cannabis heavily. He was introduced to methamphetamine at age 17 and, again, reported sporadic use since. The accused initially recalled using ice on a daily basis in the period prior to being remanded with respect to the present offending, however, subsequently stated that he may have used the drug 'a little bit'. The accused denied regular use of any other illicit drugs.

45 Dr Pandurangi explains that the accused first came into contact with mental health services in September 2016 after he was found near train tracks threatening to commit suicide. The accused was taken to Monash Health where he spent a period of approximately two weeks. The impression of the treating team was that the accused had an antisocial personality and intermittent explosive disorder. He was commenced on antipsychotic medication and a mood stabiliser, and returned to the community.

46 The accused was next hospitalised at Dandenong Hospital in October 2016 due to suicidal ideation, aggressive behaviours in the context of an argument with his father, non‑compliance with medication, and regular cannabis use. During his hospitalisation, the accused indicated that his illicit drug use and sporadic compliance with his treatment were contributing to his mood fluctuations. He was commenced on a sedating antipsychotic medication and discharged two days later with a plan to follow up with the Youth Community Mental Health Team. Unfortunately, neither the accused nor the team followed up with his progress.

47 The accused was again hospitalised in September 2017 at Northern Hospital as a result of increasing illicit drug use, including methamphetamines, cannabis, and hallucinogens. Prior to this hospitalisation, it had been noted that he had become increasingly paranoid and was experiencing referential ideas and auditory hallucinations. It was further reported that the accused had become aggressively responsive to his paranoid beliefs, and had apparently stabbed his uncle due to the belief that his uncle was having a sexual relationship with his girlfriend. It was also reported that the accused had acted with violence towards his girlfriend and had crashed her car into a tree. The accused remained in hospital for approximately three weeks and received a diagnosis of a psychotic illness. He was commenced on antipsychotic medication and subsequently discharged to his sister's house in Gippsland.

48 The accused then moved to his mother's house in Moorabbin and was referred to the Recovery and Prevention of Psychosis Service at Monash Health. The accused appeared to engage well with this service and was discharged from the service in 2018 when he moved back to Gippsland to live with his sister.

49 The accused's next contact with mental health services was whilst he was in custody in August 2019, and the consultant psychiatrist who assessed the accused, Dr Clare McInerney, noted that he had a drug‑induced psychotic episode and emotionally unstable personality traits.

50 The accused was assessed by a senior clinical psychologist, Dr Daniel Simsion, in December 2021. Dr Simsion noted that the accused presented with a high level of emotional vulnerability and a lack of adaptive strategies which led to complex and challenging behaviour. It was observed that the accused's violence was largely driven by fear during situations in which he perceived a threat which he struggled to navigate. During this assessment, it is noted that the accused reported hearing multiple voices and was receiving messages from the television.

51 The accused was further assessed on 18 August 2022 by a consultant psychiatrist, Dr Simhan, who noted that the accused might have been suffering from a psychotic illness, however, further diagnostic clarification was required.

52 The accused was assessed twice in 2023. In August, consultant psychiatrist, Dr David Trainor, noted that the accused was possibly presenting with psychosis. In September, consultant psychiatrist, Dr Evrard Harris, was of the view that the accused was suffering from schizophrenia, mixed anxiety and depression, and behavioural disorder due to polysubstance abuse. Dr Harris also opined that the accused would benefit from an attention deficit and hyperactivity disorder ('ADHD') assessment in the community.

53 The accused reported having a vague account of the events leading up to the offending and his subsequent arrest. He noted that he was released from custody on 24 December 2023, and whilst in custody had been prescribed and was taking a sedating antipsychotic medication. The accused stated that he was commenced on this medication as he was hearing voices and was not sleeping well.

54 The accused indicated that he did not take any antipsychotic medications whilst in the community, and described his mental health as 'not good'. He recalled hearing voices of both people known to him and strangers who were 'talking shit' to him, however, did not recall the voices to be threatening or in any way instructing him to do things. He did not remember feeling paranoid or having his thoughts and actions being controlled in any way by an external agency.

55 The accused reported having limited contact with his family in the week leading up to the offending, apart from speaking to his mother on Christmas day.

56 With respect to the day of the offending, the accused recalled having to leave his accommodation, a short‑term location in the city arranged by a centre which assists homeless people, because it was flooded. He decided to go to the family home and broke in as no one was present when he arrived. He recalled his mother and brothers coming home and him assaulting them as they 'wanted a fight', and striking his mother with a shovel for an unknown reason.

57 The accused had vague recollections of taking a knife from a supermarket, however, did not know why he took the knife. The accused reported having little memory of the events leading up to the offending, however, stated:

I must have walked past [Mr Triandafilidis] ... don't know why, when, how I stabbed him ... all I know that I was hearing stuff about my girlfriend and then getting arrested at my mother's house ...

58 The accused did not recall speaking to the forensic medical officer after his arrest, nor the symptoms he was experiencing whilst in prison or at Thomas Embling Hospital ('TEH').

59 In Dr Pandurangi's opinion, the accused was suffering from a relapse of schizoaffective disorder or schizophrenia, in the context of non‑adherence with antipsychotic medications at the time of the offending.

60 Dr Pandurangi explains that, prior to the offending, the accused was observed to be disorganised, unpredictable, aggressive, erratic, making unusual gestures, and wielding and slashing a knife in the air. Similarly, after the offending, the accused was walking aimlessly, threatening random strangers with the knife, waving the knife in the air, talking to himself, yelling, and slashing the knife at a tree.

61 The offending itself suggests impulsive, unprovoked, and disorganised behaviour. Mr Triandafilidis was a random stranger, and there is no indication that the accused had chosen Mr Triandafilidis or planned the offending in advance for any reason. Further, the evidence indicates that Mr Triandafilidis may not have even seen the accused coming.

62 Dr Pandurangi states that the accused's conduct post‑offending seems to indicate a lack of awareness of the offending, and the accused had no intention to conceal himself or the weapon used. Dr Pandurangi notes that, in the moment when the accused committed the offending, Mr Triandafilidis may have represented or symbolised something which caused an aggressive reaction in the accused due to him being acutely unwell at the time.

63 There is no indication that the accused's conduct was driven by other motivations such as being confronted by Mr Triandafilidis, intending to commit a robbery, or there being any grievance. Further, there is no objective evidence which indicates that the accused's mental state at the time of the offending could be attributed to intoxication or the effects of illicit drugs.

64 Dr Pandurangi notes that whilst motiveless offending is not in and of itself indicative of mental illness as a cause of the accused's conduct, the circumstances of the case and the lack of other plausible explanations or motives suggest that mental illness played a causal role.

65 Dr Pandurangi states that there is ample evidence to suggest that the accused was acutely psychotic at the time of the offending. This is clear from his behaviour as seen on CCTV footage and observed by various witnesses. Furthermore, this is confirmed by the forensic medical officer who assessed the accused on the day of the offending, and subsequently by the prison mental health team soon after the accused was received into custody.

(a) the accused's post-offence behaviour indicates that, at the very least, he was not aware of the quality of his conduct, however, whether he was aware that he had stabbed Mr Triandafilidis is difficult to comment on;

(b) on the balance of probabilities, the accused would have been unable to reason with a moderate degree of sense and composure, as perceived by reasonable people, that his conduct was wrong;

(c) both the available information relating to the accused's mental health and his behaviour around the time of the offending suggest that his capacity to reason was profoundly impaired, with a lack of any reflective thought or insight;

(d) there are no other clear alternative motivations or drivers, other than a psychotic illness, which provide a more comprehensible explanation for the accused's conduct around the time of the offending; and

(e) the defence of mental impairment is open to the accused.

67 A report authored by Dr Clare McInerney dated 16 December 2024 was filed with the Court. Dr McInerney is a consultant forensic psychiatrist at Forensicare. Dr McInerney was engaged on behalf of the prosecution to prepare a report pursuant to section 20(1) of the CMIA to determine whether the accused was suffering from a mental illness in the requisite sense at the time of committing the offending.

68 In preparation of the report, Dr McInerney had access to various materials, including the brief of evidence, body worn camera and CCTV footage, a Forensicare Mental Health Advice and Response Service report dated 13 February 2024, Forensicare records for the accused's admission to TEH between February and April 2024, Justice Health records, and Dr Pandurangi's report. Dr McInerney also conducted a two‑hour interview with the accused.

69 In addition to her report, Dr McInerney gave viva voce evidence before me at the consent mental impairment hearing on 25 March 2025.

70 Dr McInerney notes that, over the course of completing her report, it came to her attention that she had previously assessed the accused in 2019 in her previous role as a prison psychiatrist. Dr McInerney states that she had no recollection of this clinical contact, and is satisfied that this prior contact did not impede her ability to form an objective opinion with respect to the accused's mental health in this matter.

71 Similarly to what he indicated to Dr Pandurangi, the accused reported that he grew up in Wallan until the age of 13 before moving to Moorabbin. He grew up with his mother, who he recalled was a real estate agent, and his father, a construction worker, until they split when he was 19‑years‑old. The accused stated that his upbringing was 'alright, happy‑ish'. His father occasionally used physical discipline, hitting the accused and his siblings with a belt for misdemeanours, however, the accused recalled this being relatively infrequent.

72 The accused stated that his parents drank to excess, typically consuming at least one bottle of wine each per night. The accused believed that his father had recently developed a mental illness and had been hospitalised, however, he was unsure of the details. The accused reported there being no family history of mental health difficulties, however, Dr McInerney notes that one of the accused's sisters reportedly had bipolar affective disorder.

73 The accused stated that his academic performance at primary school was slightly above‑average and he had no difficulties making friends. However, when he started high school at the local public school due to being unable to gain admission to a Catholic school, this resulted in the loss of many primary school friendships.

74 As he indicated to Dr Pandurangi, the accused reported experiencing behavioural difficulties shortly after commencing at high school, and began associating with older students with whom he began drinking and smoking cannabis. He described experiencing significant difficulty with aggression in high school, and was expelled in Year 8 due to fighting with teachers and fellow students, and causing damage to property. The accused commenced at a different high school, however, was expelled soon after. He completed Year 9 in Sydney before returning to Victoria and completing Year 10, however, he was expelled in Year 11.

75 The accused explained that he enrolled in a carpentry course at TAFE, however, left after two months following an incident involving the use of a jet‑lighter to burn the back of a fellow student who took his seat. He reported not engaging in any form of further education since that time.

76 With respect to employment, the accused worked as a labourer in 2018 with the help of a family friend, however, lost the job after one year due to poor attendance and punctuality, which he attributed to drug and alcohol use. Following an extended period, the accused worked for six months in traffic management in 2021, however, stopped attending after not receiving his preferred shifts. The accused reported that at all other times he was supported by Centrelink unemployment payments and borrowing from family, and, at times, stealing food.

77 Regarding accommodation, the accused reported moving out of the family home in 2022 due to not getting along with his mother and siblings. He agreed that an intervention order was in place naming his mother as the protected person, and believed that this was because he had pushed her over, however, he could not recall the exact circumstances of this event. After leaving the family home, the accused lived with his grandmother for a short period before eventually couch surfing with friends or experiencing periods of homelessness.

78 The accused indicated to Dr McInerney that he had experienced one serious relationship when he was 18‑year‑-old which lasted for four years.

80 With respect to his drug use, the accused reported that he began drinking one to two cans of bourbon‑based mixed drinks once or twice a week and smoking one gram of cannabis per week when he was 13‑years‑old. This alcohol and drug consumption increased, and by age 17 he was smoking methamphetamine and cannabis daily.

81 Prior to incarceration, the accused reported developing a buprenorphine habit which he treated by taking methadone. He also described intermittent use of cocaine, MDMA, and LSD over the course of his life.

82 Dr McInerney's comments with respect to the accused's psychiatric history are similar to those made by Dr Pandurangi.

83 The accused reported completing an ADHD assessment with mental health clinicians at his local GP clinic whilst in high school due to his behaviour, however, was not diagnosed and instead was told that his problems were behavioural.

84 As was reported by Dr Pandurangi, the accused spent periods of time at Dandenong Hospital and Northern Hospital due to his mental health in 2016 and 2017 respectively.

85 During her viva voce evidence, Dr McInerney explained that between 2019 and 2023, the accused had been assessed multiple times which revealed personality problems, difficulties regulating emotions, and substance use issues. Over time, it became increasingly clear that psychotic symptoms were present quite frequently.

86 In the period just prior to the offending, the accused had been in custody and believed he had been taking antipsychotic medication, however, was not receiving other psychiatric care. The accused reported not continuing his medication after leaving prison for the 10 days prior to the offending in this matter.

87 With respect to his remand into prison following the present offending, the accused was initially housed in a suicide observation cell at Melbourne Assessment Prison before being transferred to the Aire mental health unit at Ravenhall Correctional Centre. The accused was admitted to TEH in February 2024, and recalled hearing a lot of voices 'talking shit' about his ex‑girlfriend, and several different voices speaking directly to him. The accused believed that the voices were trying to 'get [him] angry'. The accused reported recommencing antipsychotic medication and mood stabilisers at TEH, resulting in his symptoms dissipating. The accused was consistently observed to be manic and psychotic at TEH, with his mental state only improving after several weeks of assertive pharmacological treatment. A diagnosis of schizoaffective disorder was made.

88 During her viva voce evidence, Dr McInerney explained that it was clear very quickly following the accused's remand in custody for the present offending that he was very unwell. He had access to a number of nursing and psychiatric assessments over subsequent weeks, which ultimately concluded that he was experiencing a florid psychotic episode and would require treatment in TEH, the admission to which took some time to occur, and the accused remained very unwell whilst in prison.

89 Following his transfer to TEH, the accused received many psychiatric assessments which continued to consistently show symptoms of manic psychosis. He gradually began to improve after a period of many weeks of treatment, and by the beginning of April he had improved 'modestly'.

90 The accused returned to prison in April 2024 where soon after he self‑ceased the antipsychotic medication. He remained on some oral medication and appeared to have made an overall improvement.

91 Dr McInerney reports that the accused struggled to provide a comprehensive account of the period leading up to the offence, particularly the 10 days between his release from prison on 24 December 2023 and the day of the offending on 2 January 2024.

92 The accused stated that following his release from prison, he was initially housed by a support service at an apartment in the city. He recalled speaking briefly with his mother and sister over the phone, however, he felt that they were insufficiently supportive. The accused denied any paranoia focussed on his family, and reported that other than contacting old acquaintances who could supply him with drugs, he spent most of the time on his own.

93 The accused believed that he used methamphetamine one or two days prior to the offending, and possibly also cocaine. The accused denied engaging with a GP or mental health service during the 10 days prior to the offending, and had not taken the week's supply of medication the prison had provided.

94 The accused recalled being required to leave his apartment on 1 January 2024 due to flooding damage, and he was not able to find any housing office open to help him find alternative accommodation. With nowhere to stay, the accused went to his mother's house and broke in when he discovered that no one was home. The accused reported an argument breaking out when his mother and brothers returned home, during which he assaulted them.

95 After leaving the family home, all the accused could remember was going to Southland shopping centre, but he did not recall how he got there. He explained that he stole a knife from Safeway but could not recall what his state of mind had been at the time, and reported feeling 'distracted' by the voices in his head which were talking about his ex‑girlfriend. He then explained, '[t]hat's why I went and got the knife probably ... to protect myself'. When asked who he was protecting himself from, the accused replied, '[w]hoever'.

96 The accused reported that, by this stage, the 'voices' had been coming and going, however felt stronger at this point and this is why he became paranoid. He reported that he did not feel depressed or manic at the time, and vigorously denied any thoughts or plans to kill his own family.

97 The accused could not recall what happened after he left Safeway. He described his memory as 'blurry' and thought he could remember having the knife tucked into his waistband and taking the bus back to his mother's house, but he wasn't sure.

98 The accused could not recall what time of day the offending occurred, although suggested that it was around midday. He was not sure who the victim of the offence was and reported having no memory of the incident itself nor the second visit to Southland shopping centre.

99 The next thing the accused recalled was the police arresting him at his mother's house where he had been collecting his things. He reported initially being charged with aggravated burglary, and reported that he was shocked to later learn that he was charged with murder.

100 In Dr McInerney's opinion, the accused was floridly manic and psychotic at the time of the offending.

101 Noting the clear manic component of the accused's illness from January to April 2024, alongside the family history of mood disorders, Dr McInerney is of the view that the appropriate diagnosis for the accused is schizoaffective disorder, which is an enduring mental illness combining both psychotic symptoms and manic or depressive symptoms. During her viva voce evidence, Dr McInerney explained that the second most likely diagnosis for the accused is schizophrenia itself, which is an illness with less mood fluctuations, however, has significant persistent psychotic symptoms and requires antipsychotic medication for life. Dr McInerney stated that the distinction between schizoaffective disorder and schizophrenia has no impact on her conclusions with respect to mental impairment.

102 With respect to the role of substance use, particularly methamphetamine, the substances consumed by the accused would have worsened his symptoms in the days prior to the offending, however, they were not entirely causative. Dr McInerney explains that the accused's medical records clearly indicate that he remained overtly psychotic for at least three months following his remand into custody during which he, presumably, had no access to illicit substances. Were this to be a drug‑induced mental illness, Dr McInerney would have expected to see a substantial attenuation of symptoms in the days and weeks following the accused's sobriety whilst in custody. Not only did this not occur, the accused required a very large dose of psychotropic medication over several months to bring about a modest improvement in his mental state. This pattern, Dr McInerney opines, is consistent with a chronic mental illness rather than a drug‑induced psychosis.

103 Dr McInerney further concludes that the accused has a significant personality disorder, displaying readiness to anger, tendency to disregard the rights of others, poor tolerance of frustration, a failure to persist with activities and plans, thrill seeking, and becoming easily bored. He has demonstrated violence without the presence of a psychosis.

104 Around the time of the offending, the accused was described as highly disorganised and disinhibited, with bouts of unexplained aggression. He was observed responding in an agitated manner to auditory hallucinations for several months after the offending, despite assertive treatment. He was highly sexually disinhibited for a protracted period, his speech was disorganised and, at times, nonsensical, and he held grandiose delusional beliefs about being a Zulu King and had complex beliefs about his ex‑partner's children being sexually assaulted by his mother.

105 Dr McInerney states that understanding the offending is challenging as it lacks any clear motive, psychotic or otherwise. There are no witnesses to the actual event, and the accused does not provide any information to elucidate his thinking at the time. Mr Triandafilidis was unknown to the accused, and he has not at any stage relayed any psychotic symptoms which were focussed on Mr Triandafilidis. The accused's inability to provide an account of his state of mind at the material time is, Dr McInerney states, challenging, as there are no other accounts of the events from him contained in police, medical or other reports. Dr McInerney explains that, faced with this lack of narrative, all that can be said is that at the material time, the accused's mood was elevated and he was likely experiencing grandiose delusions, and he was disinhibited and grossly disorganised.

106 Dr McInerney states that it is very difficult to ascertain whether the accused knew what he was doing at the time, as there is no contemporaneous or subsequent detailed account of his state of mind, and he cannot recall the events.

107 Dr McInerney concludes that she can state, with a reasonable degree of confidence, that at the time of the offending the accused was floridly manic and psychotic. This was associated with gross disorganisation of thoughts and behaviours, and almost certainly with auditory hallucinations. He had a known history of anger and aggression, worsened at times of psychosis, and one can observe that, around the material time, he did not appear to be displaying judgment, reason, or composure.

108 During her viva voce evidence, Dr McInerney explained that she had little doubt that the accused was very unwell at the time of the offending, and as per her report, he was manic and psychotic. The accused was seen yelling at trees, holding up a knife and making no attempt to conceal it, even in the vicinity of the offending. He appears to wander aimlessly, both before and after the incident, and demonstrates no judgment in regard to any of his behaviour at that time. Dr McInerney stated that, on balance, the accused was someone who was exceedingly unwell at the time of the offending.

109 Dr McInerney opines that, on balance, it is more likely than not that, in carrying out the actions constituting the offending behaviour, the accused was unable to reason with a moderate degree of sense and composure about whether his actions, as perceived by reasonable people, were wrong. As such, the accused appears to have a defence of mental impairment available to him.

110 Counsel for the accused submits that, upon review of the evidence, namely the two reports and the viva voce evidence of Dr McInerney, the Court should be satisfied that the defence of mental impairment is established and should direct that a verdict of not guilty because of mental impairment be recorded as per section 21(4) of the CMIA.

111 The prosecution agrees that the evidence I have detailed above establishes that the defence of mental impairment is available to the accused, and also submits that I should make a finding that the accused is not guilty by reason of mental impairment.

112 On the basis of the evidence placed before me, I am satisfied that HHT engaged in the conduct constituting the offence of murder, by which he caused the death of Spiros Triandafilidis, and there was no lawful excuse for doing so.

113 Furthermore, on the basis of the evidence called, I am satisfied on the balance of probabilities that, in respect of the charge of murder, the defence of mental impairment has been established.

114 I am satisfied by the expert psychiatric opinions of Dr Prashant Pandurangi and Dr Clare McInerney that, at the time of committing the relevant acts, the accused was suffering from a mental impairment, namely a schizoaffective disorder, that had the effect that he was unable to reason with a moderate degree of sense and composure about whether the conduct, as perceived by reasonable people, was wrong. Both highly experienced psychiatrists have clearly agreed on this particular issue, and no dispute has been taken with their conclusions by either party.

115 Accordingly, pursuant to section 21(4) of the CMIA, I find that HHT is not guilty of the charge of murder by reason of his mental impairment. I will direct that a verdict of not guilty because of mental impairment is recorded in respect of this charge.

116 I declare, pursuant to section 23(a) of the CMIA, that the accused is liable to supervision under part 5 of that Act.

117 Pursuant to sections 24(1)(c) and (3) of the CMIA, I order that the accused be remanded in custody in a prison, being satisfied that there is no practicable alternative in the present circumstances.

118 Pursuant to section 41 of the CMIA, I direct that the appropriate person arrange to have prepared and filed with the Court, on or before 10 June 2025, a report prepared by a registered medical practitioner or registered psychiatrist, on the mental condition of the accused.

119 Pursuant to section 47 of the CMIA, I direct the Secretary to the Department of Health and Human Services to provide the Court with a certificate of available services in respect of this matter on or before 10 June 2025.

[1] Crimes (Mental Impairment and Unfitness to be Tried) Act 1997 (Vic) s 21(4).