The accused in the stabbing of three small children and an adult care worker outside a school on Parnell Sq Dublin, is fit to stand trial, Mr Justice Tony Hunt has ruled today.
Last year, Mr Justice Hunt heard evidence from the defending counsel for Riad Bouchaker (52) of no fixed abode, who is from Algeria, arguing that his client is not fit to stand trial, although it was agreed that a plea of not guilty by reason of insanity would not be sought.
Bouchaker, who came to Ireland as an asylum seeker about 25 years ago, is charged that on the 23rd of November 2023, outside Gaelscoil Choláiste Mhuire on Parnell Square. Dublin 1, he attempted to murder a male child, attempted to murder two female children, and caused serious harm to a care worker.
He was also charged with assault causing harm in respect of another male child, assault causing harm in respect of a female child, assault causing harm in respect of a French national, and one count of production of a 36cm kitchen knife.
Last December, a consultant forensic psychiatrist, on behalf of the defence, said that Bouchaker has a complex medical history and had a benign brain tumour removed in 2021. The area of skull, which had been temporarily removed to facilities, had later become infected and ultimately had to be removed, leaving part of his brain unprotected, the court heard.
She said that he is unable to stand trial in respect of the alleged offences due to his reduced state of cognitive ability, and that he is “suffering from a mental disorder by reason of which he is unable to understand the nature and course of the proceedings” and “could not instruct a lawyer”.
He suffered “further brain trauma” after members of the public intervened during the alleged attack.
He now has a “moderate mental disorder” and would need to be kept in a “secure facility” as he poses a “danger to himself and others”.
The court heard that the defence was “not canvassing” for a plea of “not guilty by reason of insanity”, but that the “point of contention” between the defence and prosecution was the “cognitive impact” of this at the time of the alleged offences.
Extensive evidence given by the defence psychiatrist outlined how, during the interview, the accused was unable to display an understanding of the process of a criminal trial or to explain back the reasons put to him about why he was in custody.
The psychiatrist said that Bouchaker was “smiling”, “cheerful” and seemed “generally unaware of the seriousness of his situation” and displayed an “inappropriate” level of “jocularity”.
He said that he was a “sick” person, that he was “disabled 100%”, that he had no money for “three years” and that he was in constant pain because of repeated dislocation of his left shoulder.
She said that he was “not responding to unseen stimuli or hallucinations,” during the interactions.
His brother, who also resides in Ireland, said that, in the months leading up to the alleged incident, the accused had been behaving in a way that was hitherto uncharacteristic, which the defence advanced was a result of the complication which arose from his cranial surgery and the subsequent infection.
Prosecutions argued the accused was fit to plead
Also last December, consultant forensic psychiatrist at the Central Mental Hospital, Dr. Paul O’Connell on behalf of the prosecution, said that it is his opinion that the accused, while suffering from significant cognitive impairments, is fit to plead as he has shown an ability to explain what happened to him on the day in question, and that “he understands the difference between guilty and not guilty.”
This is at odds with the opinion of the defence psychiatrist, who cannot be named by court order, who argued that the accused is not fit to plead.
Dr. O’Connell said that the accused was able to provided “quite a detailed account of his thinking and his frame of mind at the time of the incident,” and that he “repeatedly” referred back to a specific incident which was on his mind at the time of his alleged offending.
Dr. O’Connell told the court that when he was assigned to the case, he had expected to agree with the defence’s position that the accused is not fit to plead, but was surprised by the level of engagement Bouchaker had provided during a Garda interview, the recording of which both expert witnesses reviewed, as well as during his own interviews with the accused.
Dr. O’Connell argued that Bouchaker is “aware that he had a defence solicitor” and that he “had quite clearly, maybe a simple knowledge of what a defence solicitor is,” and was aware that this was “for his benefit”.
He said that, when interviewed, the accused “appeared attentive” and “pleased at the opportunity to discuss his case”, and that he had indicated that he wish to have “more” contact with his solicitor, although he confused the surname of the practitioner.
“It struck me that he was able to react, respond,” and make it so that his “position was clear”, Dr. O’Connell argued, adding that these observations were “a matter for ordinary common sense” rather than something to be understood with the benefit of expert analysis as, in his opinion it came down to whether the account provided by the accused “makes sense or not”.
In contrast to this, the defence’s psychiatrist argued that the accused does not have the cognitive ability necessary “to be able to instruct a legal representative” and is not able to “know that he has choices in court and be able to weigh them up,”.
She also argued that he couldn’t give a coherent account of what had taken place on the day and that he would be likely to “confabulate” and “add in” pieces of information to fill gaps in his memory.
The defence’s psychiatrist also argued that “due to his mental disorder, he doesn’t understand the seriousness of the offence,” although, “these charges are very serious matters.” She indicated that she had been unable to score Bouchaker on a Luria cognitive test which is failed at a rate of 0-2%.
The court previous heard that the accused is now suffering from moderate cognitive dysfunction due to brain trauma he received when members of the public intervened in the alleged incident, and that prior to his he had a more mild form of cognitive dysfunction due to complications which arose from the surgical removal of a brain tumour.