Other evidence available at sentencing hearing concerning the applicant's mental condition
12 In addition to the evidence mentioned by his Honour, there was other evidence bearing upon the applicant's mental state before and at the time of the offences.
13 Confining myself to the materials before his Honour, there were patent signs of emotional disturbance at the time of the episode involving the prior assault which occurred on 23 June 2001, some six months before the episode giving rise to the subject offences. At that time, the applicant, his partner and the child, were living at Goulburn. The police statement of facts in relation to that episode includes a record that, as observed by the police, the defendant, while holding the baby, went into fits of rage, smashing his head and fist against doors and walls, and that this happened several times. Other conduct by the applicant on that occasion further indicated the applicant's disturbed state of mind. He told the police that he was on medication following the earlier hospitalisation for viral meningitis which, according to the applicant, made him feel schizophrenic and unable to control his temper. He told the police that he had suicidal thoughts and had tried to kill himself by taking three teaspoons of coffee which he thought would kill him due to the medication he was taking. Whilst in the dock in the police station he began to hyperventilate. Ambulance officers were called to treat him. He was bailed on that occasion subject to conditions which included that he attend the Chisholm Ross Centre at Goulburn, which is a psychiatric unit. He was then hospitalised, either there or in some other psychiatric hospital, for two to three weeks and was discharged on medication. The applicant separated from his partner at that time and moved to live in Sydney. It was in these circumstances that disputation arose concerning access to the child.
14 There was evidence that, at some time between the June 2001 and December 2001 episodes (subsequent information shows that it was on 2 November 2001), the applicant was admitted to hospital after cutting his wrist. Early in December, the proceedings to do with access to the child were adjourned until February 2002. Precisely what orders were made on that occasion is not known but it was the applicant's perception that he would be denied access to his daughter until at least February, missing out on her first birthday and on seeing her at Christmas.
15 The note written by the plaintiff on the night before the December episode indicates that the applicant had formulated a plan to do something of the kind that occurred next day. That is apparent from the reference to a police negotiator, school children and a high school. It is also apparent that, at that time, the applicant was subject to a degree of suicidal ideation, saying in the note that he was in depression and did not care if he died or other people did. The applicant told the police in his ERISP interview that he had bought the epoxy glue and the paring knife intending to superglue his mouth shut, pour petrol over himself, light himself and cut his wrists at the same time (Q94-98). There does not seem to be any other explanation for having bought the glue and the knife. This was further evidence of suicidal ideation.
16 As for the episode of 20 December 2001 itself, the applicant's conduct was bizarre from the start. According to the teacher, Ms Dare, the applicant asked to speak to the school principal. Then when he saw the principal and deputy principal walking towards the classroom, the applicant said he did not want to speak to him, adding "I don't like him". There is nothing to suggest that the school principal, Mr Myles, was previously known to the applicant to account for that sentiment. The applicant then proceeded to barricade the door of the classroom, saying that he just wanted to see his daughter and that this was the only way that they would listen. Later, the applicant explicitly demanded that his daughter be brought to the school for him to see. This behaviour was irrational in the extreme. What benefit could the applicant possibly have obtained from his daughter being brought to the school for him to see? What kind of pleasure could he hope to obtain from seeing the child in those circumstances? As for the longer term, how could his conduct be anything but counter-productive in resolving the dispute over access to the child satisfactorily? The applicant's conduct was consistent only with a state of substantial mental disturbance.
17 The applicant was taken into custody. According to the evidence, he was examined by Dr Reid, a psychiatrist, at Silverwater Remand Centre. There was, unfortunately, no report before his Honour concerning that examination and, indeed, nothing relating to psychiatric assessment earlier than mid-February 2002. His Honour had a report of Dr R Reznik, a forensic psychiatric registrar at the Long Bay Correctional Complex, who examined the applicant on 15 February 2002. His opinion, as recorded in his report of 20 February 2002, includes a retrospective assessment.
Mr Pearson continues to present with Major Depressive Disorder and residual symptoms of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. In this sense, he continues to manifest a major disorder of mood. At the material time of the alleged offence, he was experiencing a similar constellation of symptoms, which I believe contributed to his behaviour at the material time of the alleged offences. He also continues to manifest a high degree of stress and preoccupation in regard with his familial situation. In my view, he would likely meet the terms of the Mental Health Act and can be regarded as a "mentally ill person" under that Act requiring further psychiatric treatment.
18 There was no reason to suppose that the applicant's mental state on 20 December 2001 had been any different from his state in mid-February 2002. The evidence of suicidal ideation and irrational behaviour at that time indicates strongly that it was not.
19 The reference to post traumatic stress disorder in Dr Reznik's related to an incident in November 2001, recorded earlier in Dr Reznik's report, when the applicant had witnessed a motor accident in which two individuals were burnt to death before his eyes. He had watched helplessly as these persons were consumed in a fireball. Thereafter, he had experienced a number of symptoms consistent with post traumatic stress disorder but had received no treatment for that condition.
20 After being released from custody on bail in May 2002, the diagnosis of major depressive disorder was confirmed by others, medication was prescribed and the applicant was kept under review.